Howdy peeps!
I want to refine some of my photos and try push my style of shooting further by having nicer bokeh whilst still maintaining some really nice sharpness for what I shoot.
Now, I shoot mostly nature (flowers, trees, animals etc, yet mostly flowers) and I already own a few lenses, some with quite nice results, but I want more...
Currently own the following:
Canon 50mm F1.8 which I hate (its sharp but the bokeh is awful on it)
Canon 70-200 F4L which is nice and sharp with decent bokeh (see below!)
Tamron 200-400 AF F5.6 old lens that gives me cheap reach for now
Sigma 150mm macro DG f2.8 which although the AF is slow, can take a very nice photo.
Seem to find myself resorting to the sigma lens more and more for flowers as I can go pretty much as close as I want, whilst retaining the option for distance if I choose. However, the AF on the lens is pretty poor and won't focus in low light at all, which is a shame. This can make focusing on a dimly lit flower in shade using spot metering a complete no go, which isn't acceptable really. The bokeh on this lens is rather nice though but its a shame I have to struggle with it to get a nice shot.
The 70-200 is a very nice piece of kit but I prefer the bokeh on the sigma lens. Considering jumping all the way up to the 70-200 f2.8L IS mk ii though to replace both lenses for general walk about and most nature shots I do. Would this be a wise choice? The price of the lens is mental, but is it really worth it? I could also get some extension tubes and effectively replace the tamron lens at the same time as it is only sharp up to around 370mm anyway then it goes very soft.
Also considering a 135L f2 lens as the bokeh on that is outstanding and looks like it would suit the sort of photos I like to take, plus the quick zoom is ideal for flowers blowing in the wind which my sigma lens doesn't handle very well.
TL
R = Should I buy a 135L F2 or 70-200L F2.8 IS MKii to get the quality bokeh I want in my wildlife and nature photography?
I want to refine some of my photos and try push my style of shooting further by having nicer bokeh whilst still maintaining some really nice sharpness for what I shoot.
Now, I shoot mostly nature (flowers, trees, animals etc, yet mostly flowers) and I already own a few lenses, some with quite nice results, but I want more...
Currently own the following:
Canon 50mm F1.8 which I hate (its sharp but the bokeh is awful on it)
Canon 70-200 F4L which is nice and sharp with decent bokeh (see below!)
Tamron 200-400 AF F5.6 old lens that gives me cheap reach for now
Sigma 150mm macro DG f2.8 which although the AF is slow, can take a very nice photo.
Seem to find myself resorting to the sigma lens more and more for flowers as I can go pretty much as close as I want, whilst retaining the option for distance if I choose. However, the AF on the lens is pretty poor and won't focus in low light at all, which is a shame. This can make focusing on a dimly lit flower in shade using spot metering a complete no go, which isn't acceptable really. The bokeh on this lens is rather nice though but its a shame I have to struggle with it to get a nice shot.
The 70-200 is a very nice piece of kit but I prefer the bokeh on the sigma lens. Considering jumping all the way up to the 70-200 f2.8L IS mk ii though to replace both lenses for general walk about and most nature shots I do. Would this be a wise choice? The price of the lens is mental, but is it really worth it? I could also get some extension tubes and effectively replace the tamron lens at the same time as it is only sharp up to around 370mm anyway then it goes very soft.
Also considering a 135L f2 lens as the bokeh on that is outstanding and looks like it would suit the sort of photos I like to take, plus the quick zoom is ideal for flowers blowing in the wind which my sigma lens doesn't handle very well.
TL
R = Should I buy a 135L F2 or 70-200L F2.8 IS MKii to get the quality bokeh I want in my wildlife and nature photography?
