Images from 85mm f/1.8 and 100 or 135mm f/2

  • Thread starter Thread starter susie
  • Start date Start date
S

susie

Guest
A long shot, but does anyone have images from these lenses taken at maximum aperture, and at (pretty much) the same time in dark/bad light so that I can see the difference between them.
I am not worried about the focal length, just what difference the 1/3 stop difference in the aperture would make with very low light. I would be looking at using them in an indoor arena with not much contrast between the floor, walls and horse so anything with that dark/brownish sort of background would be great.
I know most people would use flash in those conditions but its worth a try!
 
Thanks a lot, I have seen those but none that I saw were of the same thing with a few minutes difference, I need to see the same object in the same (dark) place with both lenses at max aperture.
 
Thanks for that site, even though there is not a way to compare the same subject I have tried to find some that are taken wide open at shutter speeds over 100 and none came up - looks as if I am asking the impossible :lol:

Looks like the easiest way will be to find someone local who will let me borrow one for a day and do the comparison myself, as a last resort I could hire both for a day but that will cost a fair bit in postage!!
 
Bear in mind that the 100mm f2 and the 135mm f2 are two VERY different lenses. For a start the 135mm is about 3 or 4 times the price of the 100mm. Secondly, the 135mm is one of the best primes in Canon's entire line-up. It's shockingly sharp wide open with stunning bokeh and in a different league to the 85mm 1.8 and 100mm f2.
 
Thanks, the 135 is on my list for the future. I know the other 2 will not have the same iq, I just want to see what difference the 1/3 stop difference makes on the same subject under the same conditions. I would be looking at possibly getting either the 85 or the 100 this winter, the 100 would have the better length for me but the 85 has the 1/3 stop extra light so seeing the actual difference would help me decide which to go for :)
 
What kind of difference are you looking to see? In practical terms, there will only be a fraction less depth of field with the 85 1.8 compared to the 100 2, if you shoot at f/1.8. There's pretty much nothing to choose between them.

They are basically portrait lenses.
 
Or you could get the 100IS now.

Realistically, just choose the focal length that's right for you. All the other differences are quite minor in reality.

Graham
 
Thanks both
HoppyUK said:
What kind of difference are you looking to see? In practical terms, there will only be a fraction less depth of field with the 85 1.8 compared to the 100 2, if you shoot at f/1.8. There's pretty much nothing to choose between them.

They are basically portrait lenses.
Click to expand...

blue max said:
Or you could get the 100IS now.

Realistically, just choose the focal length that's right for you. All the other differences are quite minor in reality.

Graham
Click to expand...
Neither are the perfect lens for what I want, but the 135mm is out of my budget at the moment :(
I am going to be using it in very bad light, so its not the depth of field I want to see its the difference (if any) in how the subject looks with the extra bit of light that gets in at f/1.8 compared to f/2. A bit like how much better coal in a dark place would look :lol:

I am going to see if I can borrow one or both, even if it means taking pictures of a teddy bear in a cellar somewhere so the owner does not have to worry about them not being returned!!!
 
I dunno if you'll find exactly what you want but flickr has thousands of images taken with these lenses. Find a group devoted to the lens and browse away: http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?w=all&q=canon+85mm+f1.8


I want to see its the difference (if any) in how the subject looks with the extra bit of light that gets in at f/1.8 compared to f/2.
Click to expand...
You've lost me I think. If you're letting the camera do the metering, won't they look the same? At f2 your shutter speed will be 1/3rd of a stop longer and the same amount of light will get in. Camera shake might be marginally worse if your shutter speed is borderline. If you're on manual, same iso and shutter speed, it should look like you've dialled in 1/3rd of a stop exposure compensation.
 
If I am in a dark place, want a minimum shutter speed of say 200, at ISO xyz how much more light would I get if the aperture was f/1.8 compared to f/2 they will not look the same because I will be on the point of underexposing so any extra light will be a bonus - I just want to know how big the bonus will be!!


I will be in an indoor arena with poor lighting, I need a shutter speed of 200 or faster, and I want the subject (a moving horse) to look as if it has been taken on a bright sunny day (ok so thats not possible but its an example :lol:) - so I want to try and see the actual difference that 1/3 stop will make on the picture. I can find loads of pictures taken by the lenses but none comparing the lenses on the same subject under those sort of conditions.

I would rather get the 100mm but, if the 85 with the 1/3 stop extra light will get a better picture by letting in more light, I may be better getting that.

It will mean using a nikon!! but I am waiting for someone to come back to me who has an 85mm I can try, and knows someone who may possibly have a 100mm so I can have a go and see which I prefer :)
 
susie said:
If I am in a dark place, want a minimum shutter speed of say 200, at ISO xyz how much more light would I get if the aperture was f/1.8 compared to f/2 they will not look the same because I will be on the point of underexposing so any extra light will be a bonus - I just want to know how big the bonus will be!!

I will be in an indoor arena with poor lighting, I need a shutter speed of 200 or faster, and I want the subject (a moving horse) to look as if it has been taken on a bright sunny day (ok so thats not possible but its an example :lol:) - so I want to try and see the actual difference that 1/3 stop will make on the picture. I can find loads of pictures taken by the lenses but none comparing the lenses on the same subject under those sort of conditions.

I would rather get the 100mm but, if the 85 with the 1/3 stop extra light will get a better picture by letting in more light, I may be better getting that.

It will mean using a nikon!! but I am waiting for someone to come back to me who has an 85mm I can try, and knows someone who may possibly have a 100mm so I can have a go and see which I prefer :)
Click to expand...

In that situation, 1/3rd of a stop will allow you to shoot at 1/250sec at f/1.8 instead of 1/200sec at f/2. If you want to do it another way, you could reduce the ISO by one third of a stop, from say ISO200 to ISO160 and this would give a bit more shadow detail, but it's really marginal - a third of a stop is really neither here nor there in photographic terms.

I would think more in whole stops, where you get a noticeable difference whichever way you cut it, and that means a 50mm f/1.4 might be worth looking at. But I have to say I think you're barking up the wrong tree here in what you're expected to get from a really fast lens ;)
 
1/3rd of a stop difference is not much. Try taking two images, once correctly exposed and 1 with -1/3rd exposure compensation. You have a 50mm 1.8? See if you can take it to the location & experiment with f1.8/f2
 
Depending on the body you currently have, increasing the ISO is a great way of increasing the shutter speed. Some of the newer ones allow 3200 plus and can be tamed with anti-noise software.

You should really get the focal length you need too. Having to enlarge a photo is going to reduce quality.

So, save up for the lens you need and/or buy one of the latest bodies.

Hopefully you are thinking of doing this commercially and may make a little revenue to fund this. If not, get saving :D

Graham
 
:lol: Saving is not easy when I have a rather large vets bill approaching - and before anyone says it I am insured and its over the insurance payout :(

Camera is already at maximum usable ISO (to some it would be unusable;)), hence the need for the extra aperture as if the ISO is at max and shutter speed is set the only thing with any room for movement is aperture!!

Experiment is set for late this afternoon so I will have the answer soon :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top