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 Aug 2013 (Saturday) 10:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

100/2 vs 85 1.4 switching to FF

 
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Aug 31, 2013 22:36 |  #16

drzenitram wrote in post #16257417 (external link)
I think Sigma was selling refurb s35s for something like $640... I'd jump all over that if I were you.

s50 will be most like your s30 was on crop, a replacement for 100/2 would be 160mm, so the closest you'd get to that would be a 135L since you already have 200mm. The 85 would be like a 50mm was on your crop body.

I do love my s85 1.4 though.

$640, wow. I would probably buy one now if they are still that cheap.

I do enjoy my S30 on crop, and it seems the S50 is real similar in IQ and sharpness. I used a 50 1.8 for months before caving for the S30--was too long for indoor candids and the AF too sporadic.

I do wish I had something a bit wider on occasion having two kids under two and it seems the S 35 has some of the best IQ for under $1000.

The 100/2 is pretty long on my 60D but I do my best to make it work because it is so sharp and it focuses so fast. More of the same with the 200 2.8, but the colors are better to much better. I'll miss the crop factor for field sports but little else. On those occasions there is a T4i that I can borrow as a second body.


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)
newone757
Member
235 posts
Joined Nov 2012
Location: San Antonio
     
Aug 31, 2013 22:47 |  #17

Ohh that's a hard decision. Not sure I could pick between my 35, 85, or 135. I've thought about it. But I love them all for different reasons in different circumstances.


Hands down 135 is my outdoors portrait lens. Use it all the time to grab shots of my kids playing in the backyard. You need a lot of space to work with it indoors.

85 is my go to indoor portrait lens. A more comfortable working distance compared to the 135

35 was very new to me, Im so used to tele that I felt it was wide lol, even though its not truly wide angle. But when the 85's long minimum focusing distance doesn't cut it indoors I reach for this. Allows me to really get in the middle of things. Great for taking shots with more than 1 person in the frame too.

That likely didn't help at all lol. Especially considering I have the 85 1.8 and not the sigma 1.4 . Maybe you should look into the 40mm pancake? You could pick up your 85 or 135 and then use the 40 when you need to get a little wider since its so cheap pricewise


5D Mark III - 135L 2.0 - Sigma 35 1.4 - 85 1.8 - 40 2.8 pancake
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Aug 31, 2013 22:56 |  #18
bannedPermanent ban

I have S35/50/85 and have used 100 2.0 before.

If you like S30 on crop, you'll probably love S50 as it gives the same FoV.

Having said that, S50 isn't on the same level as S35.

In terms of 100 2.0 vs S85, as 100 2.0 is pretty much identical to its little brother (85 1.8), I'd say S85 is better overall (as I've also owned 2 copies of 85 1.8 before and never liked it).


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
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,435 posts
Likes: 1614
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Aug 31, 2013 22:59 |  #19

mickeyb105 wrote in post #16257174 (external link)
Bobby, I know by your posts that you have owned a wide array of gear in the past. Are you comfortable shooting action with your S85?

To be honest I would take 85L but its twice the money. Some 85mm f1.4 copies are off. Mine so far works fine on my 5dc which has no MA. It was better on 5dmk3.

I picked a refurb sigma 35mm f1.4 for $680 like 2 weeks ago.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Aug 31, 2013 23:47 |  #20

newone757 wrote in post #16257512 (external link)
Ohh that's a hard decision. Not sure I could pick between my 35, 85, or 135. I've thought about it. But I love them all for different reasons in different circumstances.


Hands down 135 is my outdoors portrait lens. Use it all the time to grab shots of my kids playing in the backyard. You need a lot of space to work with it indoors.

85 is my go to indoor portrait lens. A more comfortable working distance compared to the 135

35 was very new to me, Im so used to tele that I felt it was wide lol, even though its not truly wide angle. But when the 85's long minimum focusing distance doesn't cut it indoors I reach for this. Allows me to really get in the middle of things. Great for taking shots with more than 1 person in the frame too.

That likely didn't help at all lol. Especially considering I have the 85 1.8 and not the sigma 1.4 . Maybe you should look into the 40mm pancake? You could pick up your 85 or 135 and then use the 40 when you need to get a little wider since its so cheap pricewise

I feel the same way about my 200 that you do about your 135. Maybe I could talk myself into a 50/135/200 combo? ;)

I've heard so many wonderful things about the S35 that ai'll probably just have to rent one to find out what all the fuss is about.

I've heard wonderful things about the 40mm pancake and I do have access to one if I ever need to give it a go. It would be a decent temporary option, but I would eventually like to have a 35 or 50 1.4 for low-light stuff. I pretty much use my S30 as a walk-around for places like zoos, Disney World, Sea World and the occasional church. I even shoot basketball on the baseline with it sometimes.


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
     
Sep 01, 2013 00:04 |  #21

kin2son wrote in post #16257528 (external link)
I have S35/50/85 and have used 100 2.0 before.

If you like S30 on crop, you'll probably love S50 as it gives the same FoV.

Having said that, S50 isn't on the same level as S35.

In terms of 100 2.0 vs S85, as 100 2.0 is pretty much identical to its little brother (85 1.8), I'd say S85 is better overall (as I've also owned 2 copies of 85 1.8 before and never liked it).

Thanks for the input. Both the S35 and S85 produce some equally drop-dead images, but I can't afford the body upgrade AND both. It seems my choice may very well be between keeping the 100/2 and adding the S35 or selling the 100 and adding the S50 and 135L.

It would be nice to be able to afford a bag with all of the S35, S85, 135L and 200L (and a 5D3 instead of a 6D, for that matter) but we're in the middle of buying a house and selling another.


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
     
Sep 01, 2013 00:06 |  #22

bobbyz wrote in post #16257531 (external link)
To be honest I would take 85L but its twice the money. Some 85mm f1.4 copies are off. Mine so far works fine on my 5dc which has no MA. It was better on 5dmk3.

I picked a refurb sigma 35mm f1.4 for $680 like 2 weeks ago.

I saw that they were on sale then, looks like the refurb sales are over.

85L would be great, impossible to justify the cost to the wife 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
newone757
Member
235 posts
Joined Nov 2012
Location: San Antonio
     
Sep 01, 2013 12:10 |  #23

mickeyb105 wrote in post #16257639 (external link)
85L would be great, impossible to justify the cost to the wife right now.

Me and you both buddy lol


5D Mark III - 135L 2.0 - Sigma 35 1.4 - 85 1.8 - 40 2.8 pancake
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Sep 01, 2013 18:49 |  #24

I have the 100mm f/2 and used Sigma 85 f/1.4 before. PQ wise they're both very good. I think the main difference is :
weight/size, the 100mm is noticeably smaller and lighter
AF. The 100mm is significantly faster and more accurate in my book
Aperture. The 85mm f/1.4 allows in one more stop of light.
Price.

If you absolutely need the f/1.4 aperture, then go for the Sigma, otherwise keep the 100mm f/2


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Sep 01, 2013 21:50 |  #25

genjurok wrote in post #16259677 (external link)
I have the 100mm f/2 and used Sigma 85 f/1.4 before. PQ wise they're both very good. I think the main difference is :
weight/size, the 100mm is noticeably smaller and lighter
AF. The 100mm is significantly faster and more accurate in my book
Aperture. The 85mm f/1.4 allows in one more stop of light.
Price.

If you absolutely need the f/1.4 aperture, then go for the Sigma, otherwise keep the 100mm f/2

Thank you for chiming in!

I've always been very pleased with the AF on the 100/2 and I think that I would like to see if it can shine on the 6D. I think maybe I got too wrapped up in trying to get equal quality to match my 200 2.8 in that mid-range, fast prime.

Chances are that whatever 35 or 50 I pick up will could be more impactful moving forward, anyway.


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
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Sep 01, 2013 22:02 |  #26
bannedPermanent ban

mickeyb105 wrote in post #16260118 (external link)
I think maybe I got too wrapped up in trying to get equal quality to match my 200 2.8 in that mid-range, fast prime.

What do you think is lacking on the 100f2 compared to the 200 2.8?


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
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Sep 02, 2013 11:25 |  #27

kin2son wrote in post #16260137 (external link)
What do you think is lacking on the 100f2 compared to the 200 2.8?

The color rendition on my 200 2.8 can be pretty spectacular, similar to the 70-200 2.8 II I used on loan months back. I prefer an aperture of for indoor sports, and the greater isolation is a bonus. The 135L would be great, but maybe a little longer than I prefer.


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
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,788 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2562
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Sep 02, 2013 11:50 |  #28

mickeyb105 wrote in post #16261301 (external link)
The color rendition on my 200 2.8 can be pretty spectacular, similar to the 70-200 2.8 II I used on loan months back. I prefer a 2.0 or lower f-stop for indoor sports, and the isolation of the lower f-stop is a bonus. The 135L would be great, but maybe a little longer than I prefer.

Please modify your references to f/stops. Then convention we use is to talk about the size of diaphram opening/aperture...so an f/stop like f/2 is a LARGE aperture, and an f/stop like f/22 is a SMALL aperture.
We do not generally refer to the magnitude of the f/number that refers to that aperture. After all, the optical characteristics are created by the largeness/smallness of the diaphram opening (not by a number).
So your statement, while not too badly worded, would be better stated, "I prefer a 2.0 or larger aperture for indoor sports, and the isolation of the larger aperture is a bonus.

This may seem like being picky and pedantic, but the point is to communicate on POTN in a common way so as to not cause confusion in other readers, who can misinterpret what we wrote in a manner not consistent with with what we meant to say. Sometimes it is apparent, but sometimes it isn't. Just trying to help, not criticize.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Sep 02, 2013 13:56 |  #29

Wilt wrote in post #16261350 (external link)
Please modify your references to f/stops. Then convention we use is to talk about the size of diaphram opening/aperture...so an f/stop like f/2 is a LARGE aperture, and an f/stop like f/22 is a SMALL aperture.
We do not generally refer to the magnitude of the f/number that refers to that aperture. After all, the optical characteristics are created by the largeness/smallness of the diaphram opening (not by a number).
So your statement, while not too badly worded, would be better stated, "I prefer a 2.0 or larger aperture for indoor sports, and the isolation of the larger aperture is a bonus.

This may seem like being picky and pedantic, but the point is to communicate on POTN in a common way so as to not cause confusion in other readers, who can misinterpret what we wrote in a manner not consistent with with what we meant to say. Sometimes it is apparent, but sometimes it isn't. Just trying to help, not criticize.

Whatever makes you happy, it has been modified.

And thank you to everyone who has given me real-world testimony of the lenses in question on this thread. You're helping a lot!

Shooting on a budget is definitely easier with the solid lens advice I've received on POTN.


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)

4,292 views & 0 likes for this thread
100/2 vs 85 1.4 switching to FF
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
1014 guests, 308 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.