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 30 Jul 2012 (Monday) 11:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

85mm 1.8 or 100mm 2.0

 
vivera
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Jul 2012
     
Jul 30, 2012 11:37 |  #1

I have a 35mm and 50mm lens right now on a full frame body. Mostly doing travel, events and some street. Now I'm looking for a longer lens, either 85mm 1.8 or 100m 2.0. Which makes more sense:

35 / 50 / 85

35 / 50 / 100

Does it make sense to keep the 50 if you have 35 and 85 ?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
imagesbybarbara
Goldmember
1,790 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 80
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
     
Jul 30, 2012 11:50 |  #2

How about the 135?


16-35 2.8L 24-105L 35 1.4L 135L 50 1.4 85 1.8 and 100 macro, 5D, 5D2, 40D, 20D, (3) 550, 2 Sunpak 555, white lighting studio set-up.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Virto
Goldmember
Avatar
1,647 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Elgin, IL
     
Jul 30, 2012 11:54 |  #3

imagesbybarbara wrote in post #14790391 (external link)
How about the 135?

135 f2 L is considerably more money, although the old (and quite good) 135 F2.8 soft-focus is available as well.

I would choose the 100 over the 85, as the 100 tends to show less dramatic CA. The difference in light stops is insignificant enough that there's little reason to take the 85 unless you're in slightly more cramped confines.

I tend to use 35mm most often, 50mm rarely unless on film (or full frame) and 100 here and there (via the 100 2.8 USM macro). I wouldn't sell the 50 if you get the 85, unless you find you never use it. Remember, wide open in bright backlighting, the 85 WILL create a ton of CA.


Kelly - EOS 5D - EOS 40D - Rebel XS - EOS 10D - EOS 1D - SX230 - AE-1 - OM-1n - Minolta Himatic7 - EOS-1N
ABR800 - Several flashes, remote triggers, stands, too many and yet not enough lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 30, 2012 12:18 |  #4

I went 85mm (for fast prime), but that is because 100mm was taken for my macro lens. I couldn't see having the 100mm macro and the 100mm f/2 (when the 85mm would do).

If it is a FL you like, then yes it can make sense to have both.

Obvious a there are those who for FF want the Canon prime trinity 35L, 85L, and 135L. There is also the 35mm f/2, 85mm f/1.8, and 135mm f/2.8 SF for a poorman's version.

Some like the 24L, 50L, and the 100L (or f/2).

IMO a triplet of primes to use is very specific to the shooter. I also don't think that prime lenses have to be in triplet sets.

I think you should get the FL you use. Also the ones you can afford, as the Canon trinity would cost $4700+.

To me I like your second group (35, 50, 100) better with the 100mm being a macro. Eventually though I'd want a fast prime around there too.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lore
Damn I failed the goat
Avatar
2,961 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 24
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
     
Jul 30, 2012 12:26 as a reply to  @ jimewall's post |  #5

On FF? I've had the 135L, I personally find 100mm a more useable length, I found them both equally fast and accurate.

135L @ f/2

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5304/5780913909_3d55f33d54_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lorephoto/57809​13909/  (external link)
Field Day - Hurdels (external link) by lorephoto (external link), on Flickr

100mm @ f/2
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7126/7632770406_b2bfe657fb_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lorephoto/76327​70406/  (external link)
Aurora Parade (external link) by lorephoto (external link), on Flickr

I find having both a 50mm & a 100mm a great combo. A 35 or 24/28 would be great as well, tho I'm opting to pick up a zoom for now.

Lore
flickr (external link) - Website (external link) - Blography (external link)
"Every photograph tells a story, What's your story?"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bigVinnie
Senior Member
Avatar
835 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 100
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Roaming the USA
     
Jul 30, 2012 12:30 |  #6

I MUCH prefer the 100.

The 100 was perfect on my crop body, but on the full frame I wish I had the 135 but can't justify the cost.


Act1 Photo Booths (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vivera
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Jul 2012
     
Jul 30, 2012 15:51 |  #7

To me I like your second group (35, 50, 100) better with the 100mm being a macro.

I don't do much macro. For true macro you need more equipment than I care to carry (focusing rail, tripod, flashes, reflectors...). I find the 50 takes me close enough for a good close-up. If I need to get closer, I crop.

If you weren't shooting macro's, how do you feel about 35 / 50 / 85 ? Or just 35 / 85 ?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
keith30d
Senior Member
904 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Londonderry, Northern Ireland
     
Jul 30, 2012 16:19 |  #8

I use 50 and 100/2 and find them a good match.


2 x 5dc::50d::canon 28/1.8::canon 40/2.8::canon 50/1.4::canon 100/2::sigma 70-200/2.8::2 x canon 430 exii
www.keithrutherford.co​.uk (external link) / keith rutherford photography facebook (external link) / keith rutherford facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Virto
Goldmember
Avatar
1,647 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Elgin, IL
     
Jul 30, 2012 16:34 |  #9

Stick with the non-macro version of the 100 if you're looking to stay light and compact for street use.

The 100mm f2.8 USM macro's rear-focus travel is huge, and it's boat slow, but very smooth and silent. The 100 f/2 is faster for sure, packed into a smaller lens barrel that means your camera won't be so front-heavy.

Although I love the 100 f/2.8, I have seriously been considering adding a 100 f/2 for working in the field.


Kelly - EOS 5D - EOS 40D - Rebel XS - EOS 10D - EOS 1D - SX230 - AE-1 - OM-1n - Minolta Himatic7 - EOS-1N
ABR800 - Several flashes, remote triggers, stands, too many and yet not enough lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 30, 2012 17:06 |  #10

vivera wrote in post #14791503 (external link)
I don't do much macro. For true macro you need more equipment than I care to carry (focusing rail, tripod, flashes, reflectors...). I find the 50 takes me close enough for a good close-up. If I need to get closer, I crop.

If you weren't shooting macro's, how do you feel about 35 / 50 / 85 ? Or just 35 / 85 ?


Those are probably my most used FLs (when not doing macro and nature), so I'd be fine with it. Keep in mind I am on a crop (I forgot to mention that before, but it is in my profile), and do not prefer wide. For most the 35mm would be great on FF.

Overall, I think I would still prefer the 35/50/100 (even if it were the 100mm is the f/2 and not the macro). On a crop I would probably switch out the 35mm with a 24mm. For that specific triplet. You have the 35mm already, and that would be fine too.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bubbygator
I can't tell the difference
Avatar
1,477 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 63
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Sarasota, sunlight, butterflies, fish, Gators, and Seminoles
     
Jul 30, 2012 17:26 as a reply to  @ jimewall's post |  #11

85/1.8 is my most used lens for inside sports... but for anything else the 100/2.0 should be just fine.


Gear List
The avatar is my middle grandson. (the TF can't tell the difference, but the fish is frowning and the kid is grinning)
Sarasota, sunlight, butterflies, fish, Gators, and Seminoles

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
leroy_sunset
Senior Member
Avatar
679 posts
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Olympia, WA
     
Jul 30, 2012 18:02 |  #12

bubbygator wrote in post #14791897 (external link)
85/1.8 is my most used lens for inside sports.

Quoted for truth. Great indoor sports lens on a 1D body.


Canon's Jurassic Park - 1Ds, 1D bodies
My traveling buddy: the trusty S95
Newest addition: T2i
Glass - 50mm 1.4, 40mm 2.8 STM, "the dirty 85" 1.8, 100mm 2.8 Macro, 430exII, 270ex, and more... including my favorite Lens: the 17-40mm!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jul 30, 2012 18:18 |  #13
bannedPermanent ban

Skip the mediocre consumer prime and save up for the proper L lens....

It's well worth it. Think further ahead.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,526 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Aug 2008
     
Jul 30, 2012 18:42 |  #14

Another vote for the usually underrated 100mm f2.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maranelloboy05
Senior Member
Avatar
514 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 880
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Arlington, VA
     
Jul 30, 2012 18:59 |  #15

I'll put my vote for the 100 as well. I've had both and very much prefer the 100. Not exactly sure why, but I just love the results from it, I wasn't as blown away with the 85.


Portraits/Automotive: Chris Schlumpf Photography (external link)
Glamour/Nude: 864squared images (external link)
Instagram (external link)
6D - 17-40L - 50mm f1.8 - 100mm f2

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

5,414 views & 0 likes for this thread
85mm 1.8 or 100mm 2.0
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 Carlosmq
892 guests, 287 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.