July 28, 2014, 10:30:11 AM

Author Topic: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?  (Read 11876 times)

eml58

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1403
  • 1Dx
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2013, 08:28:12 PM »
Everybody will have a different opinion, only you can make the decision for your photography. And you are a superb photographer that gets the best out of both the 100 and the 135.

Personally, I believe, after getting the 70-200 and the initial love fest, you will start to see slight limitations in it, it doesn't focus as close as the 100, we are not talking macro shooting, just tight closeups, and it isn't as smooth as the 135.

I would strongly advise keeping what you can until you have owned the 70-200 for a while, then make a decision based on your actual images.

The one negative that has been leveled at the 70-200 is the harsh bokeh, your images often display very smooth blurring as an integral aspect of the image.

Excellent advise, I have all three Lenses, each have their use, no doubt in my own mind for dead straight IQ, the 135f/2, even though this is an oldish Lens, is just great.

The 70-200f/2.8 L IS II is also about as good as it gets for a 70-200, but in some conditions your going to be thinking "Crap this is getting heavy", that's when you'll regret getting rid of the 135f/2, the 70-200 isn't really your "incognito" type Lens.

The 100f/2.8 L IS is for me a straight Underwater Macro, I don't think I've ever used it on Land, but I may look at Land macro at some point, so it's a keeper for me, great IQ as well.

I find it extremely hard to sell Lenses I no longer use so much, almost like selling my Children.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2013, 08:28:12 PM »

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1781
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2013, 09:06:24 PM »
They are different. I cannot comment on 100L since I do not have it but I have the other two.

135mm: discrete, light, excellent for shooting at f/2.0 - f/2.2
70-200m: Excellent but... heavy and conspicuous.

But, it all depends on the specific use. Also I take with me either but not both depending on what I want to do.

I admit I enjoy the 135 more. But this is subjective...

(Sorry I didn't help)

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1781
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2013, 09:15:58 PM »
I find it extremely hard to sell Lenses I no longer use so much, almost like selling my Children.
I understand what you mean.

But, I sold lenses I didn't like or need (and the battery grip of my stolen 40D) and saved a lot of money getting new camera and ... L lenses.

Only 1 was an L lens. The others were old non-L from the end of 80s or the early 90s (and 2 of them were SIGMA lenses)

So it depends.

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2175
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #18 on: May 16, 2013, 09:45:35 PM »
 funny,  I'm in a very similar boat.   I put my 100mmL  up for sale because I am just that impressed with the 70-200mm f2.8L is mkii.

I do not shoot that much in macro & I  know it can't quite replace  that function,  but I'm am sold on the zoom lens.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100 f/2.8L->85mm f/1.8 USM->135L -> 8mm ->100L

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2175
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #19 on: May 16, 2013, 09:55:18 PM »
 I'd probably keep the 135.    I shoot some indoor sports and I'd want the stop of light.   when I do sell the 100 I will probably get a 35 mmL. 
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100 f/2.8L->85mm f/1.8 USM->135L -> 8mm ->100L

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2059
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #20 on: May 16, 2013, 10:05:50 PM »
It is funny how we all get to where we are going via different routes.

I used the 135 f2 for years on film cameras, in fact I still own it. When I went EOS I got the 70-200 f2.8 IS and never found a need or desire for the EF 135. Just after the 100 IS Macro came out I got one and couldn't be happier.

I found, for me, the combination of features and versatility offered by the zoom and the macro were more than up to the task. And despite the acrimony and derision displayed in some threads, I have yet to meet a person who can reliably and consistently tell images shot with the 135 @ f2 and the 100 framed similarly and shot at f2.8 apart.
The best time to plant a tree is twenty-five years ago. The second best time is today.

TexasBadger

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2013, 10:09:32 PM »
Nothing can replace the 135L.
5DC, 5D3, Elan7, G12, 28 1.8, 50 1.8 II, 85 1.8 USM, 135 2.0 L, 24-70 2.8 L, 70-200 2.8 L, 560 EX, 580 EX II (2) --- all Canon.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2013, 10:09:32 PM »

offshore13

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #22 on: May 17, 2013, 03:50:28 AM »
I'm in a different position.  I'm planning to have the 70-200 II, I have the 100L first and before was planning to sell it the moment I can save enough for the 70-200 II to soften the price impact.  But  after shooting with the 100L, right now, I changed my mind.  Although I don't do macro much, I felt secured that I have that 1:1 capability in handy when I need it. 

No comment yet on the 135L, I haven't set my sights on it at the moment
kodak 110mm--> Konica FS1,--> Yashica Film,--> Canon A460-->60D, Samsung ES28

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2175
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #23 on: May 17, 2013, 09:20:28 AM »
I was absolutely in love with my 100 L  for the past year  and other 70-200  zooms  (f4 L usm, f2.8L usm) couldn't compete,  but the f2.8L is mkii  does.   it is amazing how quickly one lens can go out of favor in my heart.   The wife better recognize.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100 f/2.8L->85mm f/1.8 USM->135L -> 8mm ->100L

florianbieler.de

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile
    • florianbieler.de photography
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #24 on: May 17, 2013, 02:12:12 PM »
Yeah, I also loved my 100L, but only quite until I got the 135L ;) it is simply another tad sharper and of course way faster. I did not pull out that 100L anymore except that one time when it snowed so hard it would've killed my 135.
EOS 5D Mark III · Canon 17-40 4.0L · Sigma 35 1.4 · Sigma 85 1.4 · Canon 70-200 4.0L IS · Tamron 150-600 5-6.3 VC
EOS M · Canon 22 2.0 · florianbieler.de

skitron

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #25 on: May 17, 2013, 06:15:57 PM »
I have the 100L and 70-200 IS2. The 70-200 would be wonderful if it weren't such a boat anchor...I hate lugging that thing around. The 70-200 is noticably faster focusing and also focuses in lower light better. They give a bit of a different look but it's not huge imo. There's times for me when the 100L is nice without much in the way of limits on how close I can get.

I agree with others that if you can, buy it and keep the others, then sell something later when you have more first hand experience with the 70-200. It would be interesting to see you shoot the same model with all three in a single session to compare them! Would be fun letting people guess which lens goes with which shots.
5D3, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100L, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4 DG, Canon TC 1.4x III

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2175
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #26 on: May 17, 2013, 09:40:38 PM »
Yeah, I also loved my 100L, but only quite until I got the 135L ;) it is simply another tad sharper and of course way faster. I did not pull out that 100L anymore except that one time when it snowed so hard it would've killed my 135.

I guess the 135L isn't weather sealed.  I didn't realize that. 
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100 f/2.8L->85mm f/1.8 USM->135L -> 8mm ->100L

florianbieler.de

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile
    • florianbieler.de photography
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #27 on: May 18, 2013, 10:02:53 AM »

I guess the 135L isn't weather sealed.  I didn't realize that.

Yup it ain't for some reason, that's also the only negative thing I can say about this lens. In every other aspect it's great.
EOS 5D Mark III · Canon 17-40 4.0L · Sigma 35 1.4 · Sigma 85 1.4 · Canon 70-200 4.0L IS · Tamron 150-600 5-6.3 VC
EOS M · Canon 22 2.0 · florianbieler.de

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #27 on: May 18, 2013, 10:02:53 AM »

Kernuak

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1108
    • View Profile
    • Avalon Light Photoart
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #28 on: May 18, 2013, 02:43:19 PM »
I don't have the 100L, but I do have the 100 non-L macro and the 135, so it is sort of the same principle. The difference is, I do shoot macros a fair bit, I also like narrow depth of field, so I never considered getting rid of either of them when I got my 70-200 MkII a couple of months ago. The reason I got it, was artly due to travelling, as it allowed me to travel with less lenses. On thursday, I went out with a friend and her twins and took along the 70-200 to use, but guess which lens I also took, in case I got the opportunity for selective focus? Yep, the 135L. As it happened, that sort of shot isn't really possible for toddlers when they are running about and I didn't even try to use it, but I felt better knowing it was in there. For more standard portraits, particularly actions shots, the 70-200 is probably the one to go for and the 135 won't really be needed, but if you want more artistry, then the 135 is the one to pick up. If you do a mixture (which from some of your work you do), then both will be handy. Also, the 135 gets close to true macro if you use the full Kenko set of extension tubes, so you still have close-up capabilities, even with the Canon set or a single tube, allowing you to dispense with the 100L.
Canon 5D MkIII, 7D, 300mm L IS f/2.8 and a few other L's

mwh1964

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 187
  • 5D3
    • View Profile
Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #29 on: May 18, 2013, 02:53:26 PM »
Have the 70-200 and had the 100L, but sold it. It was a very impressive lens though, but I realized that I wasn't that much into macro as I had imagined. However, I found it very sharp also as a medium telephoto lens. And clearly, it could serve that purpose while also being a lot less cumbersome than the 70-200. A last remark - the IS works wonders.
5D3 | 24-70L II | 24-105L | 70-200L II | 70-300L | 15 fisheye | 35 IS | 40 STM | 50 f1.4 | 100L | 135 L | extender 2X III | B&W Kaesemann | 2 x 600 EX-RT | ST-E3-RT | MR14-EX | Manfrotto | Billingham | Lowepro | Think Tank

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?
« Reply #29 on: May 18, 2013, 02:53:26 PM »