I shoot their portraits, weddings and occasional reports. For those who hesitated when choosing such a focal length, as I did when comparing it with 70-200, I will say, as a portrait painter, that it should be compared (is it worth it?) only with 70-200 2.8 L IS II and thanks to: - its sharpness from 2.0 over the entire area of ββthe frame, - unique pattern and bokeh, - weight: 750g vs 1490g The Canon EF 135mm f/2L beats the 70-200 2.8L IS II for me, otherwise the 70-200 2.8L IS II wins: - stabilizer - variable focal length - (for men) the length of the member of the owner of the white lens. :) The rest of the lenses with a focal length of 70-200 are very much inferior to it in sharpness, and I personally donβt like their pattern (I had a good experience (more than six months) with all lenses with a focal length of 70-200). Inexpensive, sharp telephoto with a beautiful picture for those who can move around on two zoom legs. :) I use it often, because I have not saved up for 85 1.2 yet. :)
π· Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G Lens with Auto Focus: Perfect for Nikon DSLR Cameras
76 Review
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Lens - Fixed Black (6310B002) for US Cameras
76 Review
Black Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens - Model 1380C002
78 Review
Canon EOS SLR Camera Lens EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM
124 Review