Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 31 Jan 2012 (Tuesday) 08:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 85mm f1.8 v. 100mm f2

 
mickeyb105
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Jan 31, 2012 08:07 |  #1

I'm in the process of trying to figure out what I need to go with my 50mm f1.8 ii to compliment my current setup for my 60D. My other lens is the 55-250, and it isn't bad when I use it but it is a little slow. Thing is, I don't really use it much at all due to how much I love the pics I get with the nifty-50.

I'm going to need something bigger than the 50 to shoot high school football, though, and I don't want to spend around $1K for the 70-200 2.8 everyone seems to recommend for it.

Being that the 85 1.8 and the 100 f2 are so close in price—and within my budget after I sell the nifty-250—would either be suitable to shoot night football games in the fall (or LAX this spring?)?

I may move to FF at some point in the next 18 months, and I figured it is probably wise to build up lenses accordingly.

Thoughts?


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
johnlo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,113 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jan 31, 2012 08:14 |  #2

i would get the 85 f1.8. faster lense, better for low light - especially if u plan to shoot night gfootball games. and I would try to pick up a used one from here (POTN). i'm sure someone is selling one, and most likely its a good copy. i dont know much or anything about 100 f2. So i cant comment on that. I do have the 100 f2.8 Macro - and now i am using that instead of the 85 f1.8. only because one less lense to carry when i need to use the macro (like wedding day)


johnlo photography :
website: www.john-lo.com (external link)
personal blog: http://www.jklimagery.​com (external link)
My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,935 posts
Likes: 114
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Dallas TX
     
Jan 31, 2012 08:40 |  #3

For football games don't you think you'll want the extra reach of the 100?
They are basically "sister" lenses. Very much alike. I would get the 100 because more reach would be my concern and 100mm at f2 isn't enough of a difference from 85 at 1.8 to concern me about speed.


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
titi_67207
Senior Member
Avatar
496 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Strasbourg, France
     
Jan 31, 2012 08:55 |  #4

They have very similar optical formula. Choose the more useful focal length....

Titi


Canon 5D MkII + Sony A7 + 24x36 & 6x6 B&W film cameras .
CV 15 4.5 III | TS-E 24L II | FE 28 2 | (50+85) 1.4 | 135 2 | 70-200 4.0L | a collection of old Zuikos + FD + Adaptall + AI-s + M42

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Warlock
Senior Member
Avatar
505 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2011
Location: Stavanger, Norway
     
Jan 31, 2012 08:55 as a reply to  @ BrickR's post |  #5

If you are selling your 55-250, i would go for the 100mm, you will want to have the range for football i think. 1.8 vs 2.0 isnt really that much, the 100mm would enable you to get closer to the action.


Canon 60D, Canon 1100D , 17-40 4L , 24mm 1.4L II,Zeiss Distagon T*2/35 ZE,50mm 1.2L, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 IS L, 50mm 1.8II, 18-55 III, 430 exII,TT Retrospective 20, Lightroom 4.
Set a pen to a dream, and the colour drains from it.
R.H. Barlow and H.P. Lovecraft
"The Night Ocean"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Jan 31, 2012 10:17 |  #6

Thanks for all of the input, everyone!


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
plasticmotif
Goldmember
Avatar
3,174 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Tennessee
     
Jan 31, 2012 10:25 |  #7

They are so close, its up to your focal length preference.


Mac P.
My Zenfolio (external link) My Photo Blog (external link) My Equipment
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=14172975#po​st14172975

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hennie
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 25 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Spijkenisse, The Netherlands
     
Jan 31, 2012 10:29 |  #8

I have got a 100/F2 and am very very pleased with it.
Although it seems very similar to the 85/1.8 be aware of the following differences:
- 85/1.8 has many many more users, so if you want something exclusive......
- I use DxO and the 100/F2 is not supported on all camera bodies, wich is a disadvantage.
- If you want the wider aperture also look at the Sigma 85/1.4 quite some content users around on this forum.
- When you are planning to get a macro lens in the near future, be aware that the canon 100/F2.8 L or non-L will give you a duplicate on the focal length,
- A good comparison can be found at : Castleman (external link) wich also includes the famous 135/2.0
- another article on the 100/F2 http://photo.net/equip​ment/canon/100-2 (external link)

sample of 100/2.0 wth 40D.

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Jan 31, 2012 10:32 |  #9

plasticmotif wrote in post #13800184 (external link)
They are so close, its up to your focal length preference.

That's kind of what I was thinking.

I'm really happy with how the 50 1.8 performs, and I've heard great things about both the 85 1.8 and the 100 f/2. I've also heard great things about the 135L, but at that point if I'm spending that kind of money is it probably best to get the 70-200 2.8? The sports shooters seem to really like this piece of glass, and I've heard it gets portrait use too.

I guess I should probably be posing these questions in the sports forum, but it seems like a lot of the posters are experienced sports shooters even if they mainly shoot other stuff.


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Jan 31, 2012 10:34 |  #10

hennie wrote in post #13800214 (external link)
I have got a 100/F2 and am very very pleased with it.
Although it seems very similar to the 85/1.8 be aware of the following differences:
- 85/1.8 has many many more users, so if you want something exclusive......
- I use DxO and the 100/F2 is not supported on all camera bodies, wich is a disadvantage.
- If you want the wider aperture also look at the Sigma 85/1.4 quite some content users around on this forum.
- When you are planning to get a macro lens in the near future, be aware that the canon 100/F2.8 L or non-L will give you a duplicate on the focal length,
- A good comparison can be found at : Castleman (external link) wich also includes the famous 135/2.0

sample of 100/2.0 wth 40D.
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Thanks for providing me with a sample and some perspective as a 100 f/2 owner. Good stuff for me to chew on.


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Jan 31, 2012 10:46 |  #11

OP, they are both excellent lenses and truly "twins" save for the 15mm. The pros for the 85 is that it's a hair faster and a hair easier to handhold (pretty weak reasons, I know). The perk of the 100 f2 is that it makes some feel like it's a mini-135 f2 L. ;-)a

Honestly they are both excellent and you can't go wrong with either.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Veemac
Goldmember
2,098 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Arizona, USA
     
Jan 31, 2012 12:04 as a reply to  @ LightRules's post |  #12

You'll probably find either the 85mm or the 100mm to be lacking in focal reach for shooting football. There's a thread here in the sports section about football-related gear - take a look at the recommendations from experienced sports shooters there.


Mac
-Stuff I Use-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Jan 31, 2012 12:50 |  #13

Veemac wrote in post #13800688 (external link)
You'll probably find either the 85mm or the 100mm to be lacking in focal reach for shooting football. There's a thread here in the sports section about football-related gear - take a look at the recommendations from experienced sports shooters there.

When I shoot football, I typically move with the line of scrimmage and set up about 20 yards on either end of it between the 20's. Once either team gets into the red zone, or if one team has a reliable deep threat, I'll set up near the end zone somewhere.

The thread you provided had lots of great input on it, especially if I had deeper pockets. Then again, maybe if I want to take good pics come football season I need to be willing to part with more money than I currently want to spend right now?


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Amamba
Goldmember
Avatar
3,679 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Nov 2007
Location: SE MI
     
Jan 31, 2012 15:59 |  #14

85 /1.8 has a very fast AF, it's supposed to be one of the fastest focusing Canon lenses.c I don't know anything about 100 mm, if it's as fast then choose based on the FL.


Ex-Canon shooter. Now Sony Nex.
Life Lessons: KISS. RTFM. Don't sweat the small stuff.
My Gear List (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robertr316
Member
45 posts
Joined Oct 2010
     
Jan 31, 2012 19:49 |  #15

OP, I don't know much about the 100mm, but I picked up the 85mm for my 50D to shoot soccer, lacrosse, and basketball. As already mentioned, the AF is very fast and the pictures are sharp. Were there times where I wish the lens had more reach...absolutely, but the 100mm wouldn't have been the answer. I eventually saved enough money and picked up a used 70-200 2.8, which the only lens I take to the lacrosse and soccer fields.

If you need the lens now and don't have the budget for the 70-200 2.8, the 85 1.8 is a great lens which I don't regret getting, however, if you can afford the 70-200 2.8, that's the best lens for the job.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,741 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 85mm f1.8 v. 100mm f2
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Birdie760
591 guests, 299 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.