Canon 135L or the 100L Macro?

[sublime LightWorks]

I have both.  The 135L is a wonderful portrait lens on FF, less so on APS-C unless you're shooting outdoors with plenty of space - else, it's just too long.  Given that, I'd recommend the 100L macro.  It does, indeed, make a decent portrait lens (although the AF is a little slow), and it's great for macro, obviously.

I would avoid using a close-up lens if possible - they are challenging to sork with because your working distance is fixed to a specific distance from the lens.

I concur, owning both lenses as well, with a 5Dmk2 and a 7D.  I purchased the 135mm f/2 L first and loved using it.  When my 70-200mm failed and I had to send it in for repair, I was able to use the 135mm plus the 1.4x tele III with outstanding results as a fill in.

However, after picking up the 100mm f/2.8 Macro IS L, I find this lens to be really great.  The IS is an advantage when not shooting macro, where as the 135mm lacks that.  Putting the 100mm on a 7D gives the same crop as a 160mm.  I use this a lot more than the 135mm.

I have kept both, the 135mm's extra stop at f/2 is a help, but the IS on the 100mm is more useful.  I'm interested to see how they do on the 1DX.

Now I have to decide on either the 400mm f/5.6L or the 2.0x tele III with my 70-200mm f/2.8.

[infilm]

@old Shooter. The 24-70 is okay, but the IQ of either one of those primes knocks the zoom out of the water. I also get that with the 1.6x crop the the long end of a 24-70 is a little over 100mm. That really doesn't matter to me. The type of images I want to capture are some distance away and in an urban environment. I don't want to walk around with a giant white Canon lens screaming "hey look at me with the big damn lens!!". I my mind the choice is between the extra reach of the 135 vs the flexibility of the 100mm L macro. The latter being that I get a macro, kind of a 2 for 1. I believe that I'm going to go for the 135 and if I feel the need to shoot macro I'll throw an extension tube on and off I go.

Thanks all

[ecka]

In many situations 135L on a crop body is just too long. 85mm would be much better. On the other hand, if you want the best results, you need to get a FF camera first. Maybe 5D2 paired with something like Sigma 150/2.8 OS Macro could be the right combination - 2in1 (macro/portrait) lens with IS and outstanding image quality. What do you think?

[Mt Spokane Photography]

A better comparison is the 100mm f/2 and the 135mm L.  both are f/2.

I have the 100mm L and the 135mm L, they are for different purposes and have different strengths and weaknesses.

With my 7D, I use the 100mm l for Macro, but the 135mm L is really longer than I like for portraits, so I use my 85mm f/1.8 for portraits.  With my 5D MK II, the 135mm L is a excellent match and is my most used lens.

Much of my photography is in low light, so f/2.8 is not always adequate.

Since you have a zoom lens, look at your images and see what focal length is the most used, and the aperture settings.  The information might help you decide.

[JR]

A better comparison is the 100mm f/2 and the 135mm L.  both are f/2.

I have the 100mm L and the 135mm L, they are for different purposes and have different strengths and weaknesses.

With my 7D, I use the 100mm l for Macro, but the 135mm L is really longer than I like for portraits, so I use my 85mm f/1.8 for portraits.  With my 5D MK II, the 135mm L is a excellent match and is my most used lens.

Much of my photography is in low light, so f/2.8 is not always adequate.

Since you have a zoom lens, look at your images and see what focal length is the most used, and the aperture settings.  The information might help you decide.

I agree that the 135 on a 7D might be a bit long for portrait.  I find it perfect on the 5D (FF) however.  That said I really find it useful to have the f2 on the 135 for those low light situation compared to the f2.8 on the 100 macro.  Weither you are looking to stop action or get more light, the f2 has proven very useful for me on the 135L...

Jacques

[briansquibb]

I use the 135 with the 5DII. To get the shutter speed below 1/125 @ iso 3200, f2 it really has to be quite dark. I wonder if this obsession with low light performance and therefore NEEDING IS is a product of the modern age. I find that I know it is going to be dark and therefore have the monopod and more usually the tripod at the ready.

I have seen people moaning about no IS on a 24mm

The 135 on a ff is quite a long but excellent portrait lens, whereas on the crop it is a short telephoto. On the 1d4 I prefer the 85 f/1.8 as default short lens.

[Mikedurg]

Anyway, if you're hauling people around, get a bus. If you're hauling potatoes, get a truck.

What if you want to haul both?

Then you get an El Camino!

[Mt Spokane Photography]

If you're not that into candid street photography, you can relatively ignore the 135mm.

good luck.

The 135mmL is a portrait, theater and stage lens.   135mm lenses have been used for portraits for a long long time, well back into the beginning of 35mm cameras.  You can use it for candid photography, but that big front end is not easy to hide.

[Kernuak]

My main reason for getting the 135 was to photograph pine martens, where f/2 really comes in handy, but I have also taken some candid portraits in a poorly lit pub (not really my forte but it worked). I use it mainly on the 5d MKII, but if the light is slightly higher, then it would also work on the 7D in the right circumstances, it just depends on how far away your chosen subject is. Also, while I mainly use the non-IS 100 for macro work, with a full set of Kenko extension tubes, you can get close to half life size and it would effectively be more on the crop sensor of the 7D. Also, the extreme depth of field at f/2 at near macro gives a distinctive appearance, that you just can't get with a normal macro lens. It isn't to everyone's taste, but it opens up a whole new area of creativity. The tonality and contrast of the 135 also helps with the distinctive look.
Basically, you need to decide on your main reason for the lens. Do you want street portraits at a distance lon enough to merit the 135 or macro the most? The answer will probably determine the best lens.