Some missing lenses

[Leen Koper]

I am -as you probably know- a portrait photographer. Both outdoors as in my studio.
There is a rich choice of lenses available, but am I still badly missing some.

The lens, once to be famous, everyone had it in the bag, used to be the 2,8/135, small and light, has slowly disappeared. It used to be cheap, but an easy to construct lens.
Why is there not any left in the market? It was a wonderful lens, whatever make, ideal for both FX and DX and generally of an excellent optical quality. I would love to pay € 300 for a copy, about twice the price they used to be, but nobody seems to care.

Another, universal lens for the portrait studio would be a 2,8/35- (about ) 135 lens. On DX it would be a great 50-200 lens and on a FX sensor it would be ideal for portraiture. Another missing lens that -in my opinion- would attract quite a lot of portrait photographers if it would be priced at about € 500. The Sigma and Tokina lenses in that focal area start at only 50 mm, just a little too long for DX.

About 25-30 years ago Tokina manufactured a great 60-120 lens. Wonderfull for portraiture on film, so for FX users too. Why does not any manufacturer produce something like that any more? Or, preferably, a 2,8/ 50-150 lens for FX?
At a price point of about € 500 I wouldnot hesitate to buy one.

These are three lenses I would buy immedeately and I suppose I am not the only one.

Just my 5 cents

[Leen Koper]

I forgot something: it would be nice if they were VR-lenses.....

[Stany Buyle]

Hi Leen,
Having seen the way you work and taking the amount you want to spend in consideration I think the 70-300 AF-S VR would be a good choise for you.
It is perfectly useable both on FX and DX and optically much better than the former 70-300 generations.

[Leen Koper]

I allready own a copy.
But it is no 2,8 lens, unfortunately and much larger than the lenses I miss.

[Stany Buyle]

I allready own a copy.
But it is no 2,8 lens, unfortunately and much larger than the lenses I miss.

During our visit, you told us that F2.8 makes no sense for portraiture...

and...

]About 25-30 years ago Tokina manufactured a great 60-120 lens. Wonderfull for portraiture on film, so for FX users too.

It is not always so that a lens which was great for film, is great for FX digital...

[Leen Koper]

You are right, absolutely. It makes no sense, but it is easy to produce with hardly any substantial cost involved. And it might make focussing easier. that is why I bought a 70-300 instead of the 70-200/2,8.

The 60-120 of about 30 years ago would IMHO still be a great portrait lens, be it that it should be modified to modern standards in the field of resolution, certainly in a studio environnement. In those days we didnot do any studio portraiture on 35mm, just on 120 film. Probably there was hardly any interest in those days, but now, with digital full frame cameras, it would be quite different.

[Guy Van Hooveld]

there are a few old 3.5 AIS lenses which are excellent:
75-150mm
50-135mm