135 L or 100 L macro?

which would you buy and why?

135L for portraits and outdoor action shots is possible, 100 Macro IS for macro and portraits

I'd buy the 135L. Why? I already own the 1-stop faster EF 100 f/2, and the excellent efs 60mm f/2.8 macro. Not sure any of that applies to you, though.

I consider them very different lenses. I'm unsure of your intended purpose, but if you're using it for outdoor portraits, the 135 @ f/2 hands down. If you're using it for indoor portraits, consider an 85mm or even the EF 100mm f/2 (non-L) that GeoKras1989 mentioned.

One of the 70-200 lenses might be a contender too.

I'd buy either depending on my specific considerations. What are yours?

Depends on what you want to do and whether or not you want/need the extra stop on the 135. I considered both lenses when I was shopping, but the Macro won out for me for that purpose, and I didn't really need the extra stop on the 135 since I'm not really using the lens indoors all that much.

I've had both and I still have the 135L.

The reason I kept the 135L is because I have a 15 month old and 95% of my shots are of him. IS doesn't help too much with a squirmy, little guy that does not listen to you. I have to keep the shutter speed as fast as possible. I just like the shots that come out of the the 135mm more than I did the 100L. But I freely admit that it may be the placebo effect.

For general shooting, I think the 100L is more versatile. It is a tad wider, has IS and is weather sealed. It is a great portrait lens as well.
And of course, it is a true 1:1 macro lens, which means closer focusing.

Soooo...bottom line, do I regret my choice of keeping the 135 and selling the 100....sometimes yes. Yesterday at the zoo, I really wanted a close focusing lens to get up close to a snake's eyes and I really wanted to get some detail of other animal's features.
Just because I miss the 100L does not mean I like the 135L any less.

And that is the conundrum. The canned forum answer is always "get both". I think it applies here Aside from focal length, the mission statement of these lenses is quite different.

I own both. I could never part with the 100mm 2.8L. I just recently bought the 135mm. It also is truly an amazing lens. )I plan on keeping both). Its all going to come down to what type of shooting you'll be doing. If you are going to shoot a lot of Macro, obviously the 100mm is the way to go. If not the 135mm is truly a special lens.

Sgt. wrote in post #17497678
which would you buy and why?

Heya,

Depends on purpose. If you just wanted a fast telephoto for portrait, they both work. You get more isolation with the 135L, but the 100L gives you true macro and IS. Granted, one can use an extension tube with the 135L and make it do macro, but it will always lack IS.

If you want the more versatile lens, the 100L is it.

If you want the fastest telephoto that is affordable, for environmental portrait with lots of isolation, the 135L and 200 F2.8L will do this.

I have a 200 F2.8L instead of the 135L, so for me, the 100L is the better buy in terms of wanting a versatile fast telehpoto that is good at a lot of things and has features other lenses in the running do not.

The 135L is magical in it's rendering, sure, but it's not going to help someone not doing portrait or who's really into macro, etc. It's not for everyone.

Very best,

Similar FL but very different lenses.
The obvious is if you like macro the 100, portraits the 135.
However, I've used the 100 for portraits and the 135 for macro and they work well.

Thanks for the feedback. It will be for general shooting, at this point I am leaning towards the 100.
It seems like it is the more versatile of the 2.
I have never done any macro, mainly because I have not had a macro lens.

I've got both, general shooting would be 100L. I wish the 135 had IS.

Sgt. wrote in post #17498395
Thanks for the feedback. It will be for general shooting, at this point I am leaning towards the 100.
It seems like it is the more versatile of the 2.
I have never done any macro, mainly because I have not had a macro lens.

I would go with the 100L. You won't be disappointed

100 is certainly a more versatile lens.

Plan on buying both becuase they are both great but different tools even if FL is similar. If you are primarily interested in macro buy the 100L first. Otherwise the 135 will be more versatile for focusing.