100 Marco f2.8 or 135 f2L. Please help.

[spacemickey]

Hi everyone,

I am thinking of buying either the 100 macro f 2.8 or 135 f2L. But I need advice as I couldn't decide on each one.

I take all kind of photos, nothing specific.

Please help.

[mpenza]

if you include macro shots in the range of photos, get the 100macro f/2.8 USM.

[plinius]

the prices for the 2 lenses like quite wide leh, u using it on SLR or DSLR?

Originally Posted by spacemickey Hi everyone, I am thinking of buying either the 100 macro f 2.8 or 135 f2L. But I need advice as I couldn't decide on each one. I take all kind of photos, nothing specific. Please help.

[spacemickey]

I am using on 300D.

Last time I checked, 135 f2L cost $300 more.

Which one is a better buy? Thanks.

[DEADMETAL]

If the price difference is not too wide get the L, if not stick to the non L unless u get paid for the photos u take

[mpenza]

depends on what you want to use it for mah. focussing speed and bokeh wise, the 135/2L is better. sharpness, i believe both are similar.

there's also the 100/2 and 85/1.8, both excellent lenses and cheaper than the 2 lenses you shortlisted.

[spacemickey]

Thanks everyone for the advice.

But still cant decide...

[DEADMETAL]

Look back at your previous photos you have taken, see if you really need one.

[mpenza]

wat other lenses do you have?

I personally found no need for the 135/2L when I got a 70-200.

[plinius]

true! so u want or need?

for me i sold my 100mm Macro F2.8 and 28mm F2.8 coz i wanted them instead of needing them....

heh..........

Originally Posted by DEADMETAL Look back at your previous photos you have taken, see if you really need one.

[spacemickey]

I have been shooting for the past 1 year using only a 50 f1.4.

Now I have saved enough money to get my next lens which is either the 100 marco or 135 f2L.

I like the 70-200mm, but it is too heavy and i prefer prime.

Thanks.

[plinius]

dude,

the 135f2 is the heaviest at 1.64lb (744gm), follow by 70-200 at 1.56lb (708gm), then 100mm f2.8 at 1.32lb (599gm).

going by weight alone, your choice would then be the 100mm Macro.........

Originally Posted by spacemickey I have been shooting for the past 1 year using only a 50 f1.4. Now I have saved enough money to get my next lens which is either the 100 marco or 135 f2L. I like the 70-200mm, but it is too heavy and i prefer prime. Thanks.

[mpenza]

plinius quoted for the 70-200F4L. the f2.8Ls are significantly heavier.

[Castlesinthesky]

i sure like my 135 f2L, if you're using it for events and concert photography, a definite must buy.

[Electrin]

This is a question I find myself asking as well.

Do I:

want to go into macro?

and if not,

is the difference in performance between the 135 and 100 worth the extra money?


Pardon the pseudocode. I mean, if both lenses are the same when taking portraits, I'd rather get the "free" macro right.

[plinius]

my bad my bad!


f2.8L!

Originally Posted by mpenza plinius quoted for the 70-200F4L. the f2.8Ls are significantly heavier.

[ricohflex]

Buy the "L"

not the 135 F2 L .
which is a good lens.

L for Leica.
Before you buy, borrow a Leica 90mm f2.8 R. If you have a R to EOS adapter, good.

Shoot.

Look at the pictures.
.....................................no further explanation required.

[megaweb]

I would recommend you to use a tele zoom lens like 70-200mm. Add closeup or ext. tube for closeup photography and add teleconverter for nature photography.

[spacemickey]

Hi Megaweb, you mean the f4 or f2.8 version? I cant afford the f2.8 version. By adding closeup or ext. tube for closeup photography, will it be expensive?

Hi Ricohflex, is it expensive?

All I could fork out is $1.5k only. And I won't be buying another lens for another year, cos need to save up.

Thanks again for all the advices?

[megaweb]

Originally Posted by spacemickey Hi Megaweb, you mean the f4 or f2.8 version? I cant afford the f2.8 version. By adding closeup or ext. tube for closeup photography, will it be expensive? Hi Ricohflex, is it expensive? All I could fork out is $1.5k only. And I won't be buying another lens for another year, cos need to save up. Thanks again for all the advices?

either f4 or f2.8 version can use ext. tube or closeup lens for closeup photography ...

a 3rd party ext. tube costs abt $80++

of course f2.8 would be more useful for low lighting photography but expensive and heavy