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 01 Feb 2017 (Wednesday) 22:09
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Who Owns All 3 of These Lenses and Why?

 
Nethawked
Senior Member
802 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 243
Joined Oct 2014
Location: Virginia, USA
     
Feb 06, 2017 13:07 |  #16

CheshireCat wrote in post #18262380 (external link)
95% redundant.
The 100 is only needed if you shoot macro.
The 135/2 is like the zoom stuck at 135, you just get the extra stop and a smaller/lighter package.

See a doctor to cure your GAS ;-)a

Not really. Maybe redundant in focal range but use not so much.

I've sold the 135mm so I may not qualify. Personally, I prefer bokeh from either 85mm or 135mm over the 100mm macro but not by a huge bunch. All three are fine lenses with great IQ, color and sharpness. But they aren't the 70-200mm. Like others this is my workhorse, it's just so good that nothing really compares. But it's heavy as all get-out and as with the big whites, somewhat intimidating. For this reason a smaller, lighter portrait lens with some decent reach is always a good thing to have around. Because of its versatility the 100mm macro is a tough lens not to own in my opinion, but if you aren't interested in tiny things then the alternatives are probably better.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
smcintosh
Member
67 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Dec 2008
     
Feb 10, 2017 11:20 |  #17

I have the 135L, 70-200 IS II and the 100 non-L macro so I sort of qualify to answer.

The 70-200 is just too big for me to take on e.g. vacation or a city trip. I use it if I'm going to be close to a base or just going for a walk in the afternoon. It really weighs down a travel bag!

I have the 135L that I routinely tote as a second lens on trips, vacations, or just to get that slightly different 'artistic' look. I did think of getting the 70-200 f4 for travel, but I'm more of a prime guy and just love the low DOF look I can get with the 135L or f2.8 zoom.

I only use the 100 for macro.

To each their own and I think it really depends on your finances. If you can afford to have thousand dollar lenses for 'occasional' use then it's all just fun.


5D IV | 40D | 16-35 f4 IS L | 35L | 50L| 85L II| 135L | 70-200 f2.8 IS II L | 400 5.6 L | MP-E 65 | 100 2.8 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fplstudio
Senior Member
Avatar
410 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 1918
Joined Jun 2015
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Feb 11, 2017 05:47 |  #18

Each of them (100L macro, 135 L, 70-200 2.8 L ii) has its own place and can live wonderfully in the same line up.

I cover the macro-like section with the 100-400 ii, have the 135 f/2 L and preferred the 70-200 f/4 IS for portability. Use all 3 often.

It seems however that you want a portrait lens and don't shoot macro, so there are better choices here (135, 100/2, 85/1.2 or 1.8). It seems also that your 70-200 2.8 L ii is lovely but too heavy to bring it around anytime. The indications given seem to lead to the 135 f/2 L.


10+ years with Canon, now new fresh air with Sony Full Frame
A7R3 | A6300 | MC-11 | FE 16-35 GM | EF 35 1.4 Art | FE 55 1.8 | FE 85 1.8 | EF 70-200 4L IS | FE 100-400 4.5-5.6 GM OSS | E 10-18 4 OSS | E 35 1.8 OSS
Godox AD200 | V860ii | 2x TT600

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
runninmann
what the heck do I know?
Avatar
8,156 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 150
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Michigan-U.S.A.
     
Feb 11, 2017 16:22 |  #19

I own all three. Why? Because I'm a no-talent gear head.


My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NWPhil
Senior Member
440 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Oregon
     
Feb 12, 2017 01:36 |  #20

different tools for different fools - nah, not really
They serve different purposes, and I see no conflict owning all three, but I would pick the 70-200 if only could have one.

Now, what about having four 100 mm lenses?
canon EF 100mm f/2.8
Zeiss ZE 100mm f/2
Leica APO Elmarit R 100mm f/2.8
Meyer-Optik Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm f/2.8


NWPhil
Editing Image OK
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,529 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 601
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Feb 12, 2017 07:51 |  #21

Having the 70-200/2.8 IS II and cameras I was comfortable with at higher ISO, I no longer found a need for the 135L and so I sold it. The one stop difference at 135mm just isn't enough of a difference for me to own both, and most of the time I would consider mounting the 135L, I'd just use the zoom for the versatility instead.

I've never owned the 100 macro because I don't shoot macro subjects. If you are just looking to shoot portraits and you will have the 70-200/2.8 IS II, then IMO the 100 macro is completely redundant. The focal length is covered and the lenses are the same maximum aperture. I really can't imagine owning both of these lenses unless I had the macro in my kit specifically to shoot macro anyway.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Feb 12, 2017 08:12 |  #22

100L is redundant if you own either the 135 f/2 OR the 70-200 2.8 and don't care about macro.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Feb 12, 2017 13:51 as a reply to  @ vengence's post |  #23

And the 135 is redundant if you own the 70-200 2.8 and don't care about weight/size and extra stop.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
d.tek
Senior Member
297 posts
Likes: 189
Joined Oct 2008
     
Feb 16, 2017 06:54 |  #24

I have 100 macro non L, Rokinon MF 135 f/2 and a 70-200 2.8 II

I literally only use the 100 for Macro, The Rokinon wasn't too expensive so it just feels like a nice to have lens, but now that I have a 70-200, I can't imagine I'd use the 135 much anymore, and it hasn't been on my camera since.

The 100 will always stay for macro purposes.


Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,481 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Likes: 982
Joined Oct 2014
     
Feb 16, 2017 18:57 |  #25

runninmann wrote in post #18270771 (external link)
I own all three. Why? Because I'm a no-talent gear head.

Can I join your club?


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/127590681@N03/ (external link)
I love a like, but feedback (including CC) is even better!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
photosbytw
Goldmember
Avatar
1,345 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 1214
Joined Jan 2015
Location: Blue Ridge Mountains
     
Feb 16, 2017 19:13 |  #26

LonelyBoy wrote in post #18275930 (external link)
Can I join your club?

If there isn't, lets start one...........I nominate runninmann as president, lonelyboy for vp!!!!!!!!!!!


Don't even begin to think I'm criticizing your images.
Just a natural curiosity.
tw

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,810 posts
Gallery: 85 photos
Likes: 905
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Feb 16, 2017 22:29 |  #27

CheshireCat wrote in post #18271413 (external link)
And the 135 is redundant if you own the 70-200 2.8 and don't care about weight/size and extra stop.

And the 70-200 2.8 is redundant if you own the 70-200 f4 and don't care about the extra stop and ......


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Feb 17, 2017 00:42 |  #28

ejenner wrote in post #18276152 (external link)
And the 70-200 2.8 is redundant if you own the 70-200 f4 and don't care about the extra stop and ......

Indeed, but that lens is not in the set we are discussing.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
runninmann
what the heck do I know?
Avatar
8,156 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 150
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Michigan-U.S.A.
     
Feb 17, 2017 10:54 |  #29

LonelyBoy wrote in post #18275930 (external link)
Can I join your club?

photosbytw wrote in post #18275951 (external link)
If there isn't, lets start one...........I nominate runninmann as president, lonelyboy for vp!!!!!!!!!!!

While I am eminently qualified for the "no talent" part, I'm sure there are many others better suited for the "gear head" portion of the job. ;-)a:-)


My Gear

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

6,082 views & 18 likes for this thread
Who Owns All 3 of These Lenses and Why?
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 mentalcare
2356 guests, 232 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.