# Advice on a telephoto lens for street photography



## killswitch (Mar 6, 2013)

If you were to use a telephoto lens (zoom/prime) that's not white in color for both day/night street photography which one would you go for and why?

I usually use the 24-70 for street photography now, but looking for a longer glass. These lenses come to mind, and I would love to hear your thought/opinion/suggestion.

1) 100mm f2.8L IS
2) 135mm f2L
3) 200mm f2.8L II

Edit: Will be used on the 5D3. And mainly for street/outdoor portrait, candid shots of people, street activities like parades, festivals, etc. I like to shoot wide open in most cases to get the background to melt away. Also, like to shoot at night as well.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Mar 6, 2013)

What body are you using it on? And can you tell us what kind of street photography you like to do? Give as much detail as you can please.


----------



## helpful (Mar 6, 2013)

I've been full circle almost using almost every option for extensive periods of time, zooms to primes, fisheyes to 400mm f/2.8 II. Right now at the moment I am starting to fall in love again with the 200mm f/2.8L II lens for just the purpose you mention. Nothing is as comfortable, as stealthy, or as effective.

I have the 70-200mm II, and I practically hate that lens as a working tool. Carry one around 14 hours and you'll hate your life. Carry the 200mm f/2.8L II lens around for the same length of time, and you'll be smiling at the end of the day and probably have way better pictures as well.

If you're doing night street photography, the 135mm would make sense as well, but the 200mm focal length just has that perfect framing for candid photos and continues to have nice backgrounds wide open at longer distances than the 135mm.


----------



## killswitch (Mar 6, 2013)

drmikeinpdx said:


> What body are you using it on? And can you tell us what kind of street photography you like to do? Give as much detail as you can please.



Thanks. =) I have put in the details as suggested.


----------



## gjones5252 (Mar 6, 2013)

I cannot speak for the other lenses but i can say the 100mm 2.8l should not be use for night time street shots unless you plan on manually focusing. The lens is amazing but i have to switch to something faster for focusing. In my experience with street photography you have a split second to capture a look if your lens is spinning back and forth it can get real old real quick.


----------



## killswitch (Mar 6, 2013)

helpful said:


> I've been full circle almost using almost every option for extensive periods of time, zooms to primes, fisheyes to 400mm f/2.8 II. Right now at the moment I am starting to fall in love again with the 200mm f/2.8L II lens for just the purpose you mention. Nothing is as comfortable, as stealthy, or as effective.
> 
> I have the 70-200mm II, and I practically hate that lens as a working tool. Carry one around 14 hours and you'll hate your life. Carry the 200mm f/2.8L II lens around for the same length of time, and you'll be smiling at the end of the day and probably have way better pictures as well.
> 
> If you're doing night street photography, the 135mm would make sense as well, but the 200mm focal length just has that perfect framing for candid photos and continues to have nice backgrounds wide open at longer distances than the 135mm.



I know right? To think the 200mm f2.8L II costs only $550-600 used. Which is a steal I think.


----------



## robbymack (Mar 6, 2013)

I'd go either 135L or 200 2.8 I'd probably debate back and forth the merits of both but I guess realistically since neither has IS I'd probably lean towards the 135 not only is it faster but presumably I can handhold it at 2/3 stop slower shutter speed letting in more light. Plus the 135 is one of those ubiquitous canon lenses you'll use for everything. Total side note, checked out your Flickr, apparently we're Flickr contacts.


----------



## scottkinfw (Mar 6, 2013)

A bit off from your topic, but consider a 24- 105. Small and light to carry, won't draw attention, great images. Flexible. Short for the tele, but very versatile especially when you get into crowded street scenes. I am thinking about last Halloween when I was glad to have this lens on Bourbon street.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 6, 2013)

16-35 2.8L II is perfect for street work, night and day.
Wide lets you get close and talk to people, gives you a sense of place, and let's you capture discrete photos because people do not suspect that they are in the frame of the ultra-wide.


----------



## mb66energy (Mar 6, 2013)

Ever considered to choose a 2.0/100 ?

It's an almost boring lens in terms of pure specs: No IS, no red ring but: it is short, a little bit longer than the 1.4 50mm and hence very unobtrusive. IQ is very good from f/2 on: high contrast, very good texture rendering. Just sharpness increases if you stop down a little. AF/USM is very fast.

Just my 2ct - Best, Michael


----------



## helpful (Mar 6, 2013)

mb66energy said:


> Ever considered to choose a 2.0/100 ?
> 
> It's an almost boring lens in terms of pure specs: No IS, no red ring but: it is short, a little bit longer than the 1.4 50mm and hence very unobtrusive. IQ is very good from f/2 on: high contrast, very good texture rendering. Just sharpness increases if you stop down a little. AF/USM is very fast.
> 
> Just my 2ct - Best, Michael



That's great advice, too. Many times I'm somewhere at a big basketball game with my big lenses in my box and using my 100mm f/2, surrounded by people with their big lenses. And I'm the one getting all the shots with the 100mm's lightning fast focus, high light transmission, and almost perfect focal length for that job. As Louis L'Amour stated, only the very best gunfighters never need to prove it to anyone, and all the rest do. The 100mm doesn't need to prove itself with huge size or a white case, because it is one of the very best.


----------



## RS2021 (Mar 6, 2013)

As you specify telephoto range and inconspicuosness and possibility of use at night, 135L is a no brainer.


----------



## EvilTed (Mar 6, 2013)

Anything over 50mm is not street photography, it is voyeurism 

ET


----------



## RS2021 (Mar 6, 2013)

EvilTed said:


> Anything over 50mm is not street photography, it is voyeurism



How true! 

And from a practical standpoint, street photography is a tad dicey past ~70mm at least in real street situations... you have too many obstructions, people get in the way, closer walkers blur a lot faster, while some of this can be viewed as "creative"...in real life, a litle "creativity" goes a long way. 

Also with telephoto lenses you lose the intimacy that is a vital component of most memorable "street" shots.

In street photography my personal creed is:

-Pixel peeping is counter productive. 
-The moment matters, fast autofocus helps.
-Be wide enough to include some context to the scene. 

For all these reasons my preferred lenses remain the 35L or 50 f/1.4. However, depending on the context, even the 85 f/1.8 or 135L can work, but I would call those instances rare.

Edit: I left out in the list "do _not_ use over-obvious equipment and big bulky zooms...it is off-putting; smaller the footprint, the better". But in someways even the 35L, 85 1.8 and 135L with hoods break this rule as they are rather noticeable.


----------



## killswitch (Mar 6, 2013)

robbymack said:


> I'd go either 135L or 200 2.8 I'd probably debate back and forth the merits of both but I guess realistically since neither has IS I'd probably lean towards the 135 not only is it faster but presumably I can handhold it at 2/3 stop slower shutter speed letting in more light. Plus the 135 is one of those ubiquitous canon lenses you'll use for everything. Total side note, checked out your Flickr, apparently we're Flickr contacts.



Hey, yeah, haha...did not know we are contacts till now! ^_^


----------



## EvilTed (Mar 6, 2013)

Any of the new IS primes will be very good for street:

24mm, 28mm, 35mm - take your pick...

Personally, I now use a Leica with a 50mm Summicron F/2 and use hyperfocal focusing...

ET


----------



## John (Mar 6, 2013)

i recommend the 24-105 f/4. awesome lens with a zoom range. there are times when i use it that i miss a 2.8, but not as often as i thought. i use this lens more and more as time goes by. it is my go-to lens for just walking around and shooting stuff. i have the 135 f/2 as well and i love that lens, but the fixed focal range is self-limiting. i love the 70-200 f/2.8 but it is a heavy lens and it lacks the wide angles that u want sometimes. get the 24-105 f/4. u will not regret it. it is an L lens so it will cost a few bucks.

by the way, i have the 24-70 and i hardly ever use it any more. i much prefer the 24-105.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 6, 2013)

I repeat myself, but go wide for the street.

Street photography is photojournalism. The most compelling and award winning news photos are made using a wide to ultra-wide focal length. The wide angle places the viewer in the action.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 6, 2013)

EvilTed said:


> Anything over 50mm is not street photography, it is voyeurism



The longer I do street photography, the less dogma I have or accept, but this is one I subscribe to. Real street photography is in close.

To the OP question:

I wouldn't use any of the lenses you mention for anything I'd consider "street photography." I have used the 135mm for candid portraits on the street sometime, but I use it mostly at night on the street.

Best, I believe, is anything 35mm to 50mm -- the 40mm "pancake" is great. Some of the best stuff can be done with UWA because it makes you get in close and still retains context. I do like the 24-105 suggestion -- it can make life on the street a lot easier. (The older you get, the more you look for easy!)

Oh, and while we're on the subject, if you don't know this site, you should look at it:

http://www.humansofnewyork.com/

It's not classic street photography, but it's a great and very entertaining variation with great street photography attitude. His story of raising $100K to send kids to summer camp is a great outcome of someone inappropriately using his images.

Sorry, don't mean to hijack the thread, but this is worth a look -- especially for anyone interested in street photography and copyright issues.


----------



## Boyer U. Klum-Cey (Mar 6, 2013)

I am partial to 16-35, but at my age, the pancake might make sense. Does anyone know of a "bacon" promotion to go with it? Fortunately, my cardiologist is not a member of this site, eh?


----------



## 7enderbender (Mar 6, 2013)

I have both the 135 and the 200. Both are excellent and great value really. So it comes down to which focal length you want. I personally would consider the 135 more of a street photography lens - the 200 might be a bit too tight but it depends on what you're intending to do and your style.
Can't speak to the macro. I'm certain it's great also and has the added benefit of, well, being a macro lens. I personally would prefer it without the IS.


----------



## TexPhoto (Mar 6, 2013)

How about an 80-200 f2.8. It's black.


----------



## RS2021 (Mar 6, 2013)

TexPhoto said:


> How about an 80-200 f2.8. It's black.



Ha! Looks like what James Stewart was using in the _Rear Window_. The plot of the movie involves "voyeurism" that gets people into trouble.


----------



## EvilTed (Mar 7, 2013)

Just got my new Leica M on order 

Seriously, you don't want to scream paparazzi at anyone while doing street, and while you can sit somewhere out of sight with a telephoto, like a sniper waiting for a victim, although you may get what appear to be good candid shots, you are missing out on the main part of the art, which is the interaction with YOU.

If you are new to street photography and you really want to feel it, I'd suggest getting the new 35mm F/2 IS.
This will give you great hand held shots with a 5D MK3 due to it's high ISO capability.
THE IS will help a lot too.

It can be pretty dangerous sometimes too and you will get challenged by some people, but that's part of the art, having the confidence and the balls to just take the shot...

ET


----------



## LostArk (Mar 7, 2013)

There's nothing inherently more voyeuristic about using telephoto lenses for street photography as opposed to normal lenses. It's all about intent. How the subject feels about your choice of gear is irrelevant. Being blatant or inconspicuous has nothing to do with gear. No photographic genre places a limit on "acceptable focal lengths." Unfortunately, street photography is riddled with elitist stigmas perpetuated by Leicaphiles and Cartier-Bresson worship. 

Landscape photography can only really be taken with a view camera. Ansel Adams demands it.

See how ridiculous it is?

135L is the best telephoto for street, hands down. A case can be made for the 100 f/2 (cheaper, smaller) or 85L (effectively 2 stops faster than the 135). Not so much the 85 1.8.


----------



## LostArk (Mar 7, 2013)

EDIT:

double post


----------



## EvilTed (Mar 7, 2013)

So why don't you show everyone examples of great street photography taken with a Canon camera and a 85 - 135 lens?

I can show you examples countless, famous street photographers, from the 1950s to now that have used that elitist Leica stuff and 21 - 50mm focal lengths...

Don't take my word for it though, try Google 

ET


----------

