carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #8 · 135 f2.0L or 100 f2.8 Macro | |
mh2000 wrote:
get the one you think you want the most first, because after that it will be hard to justify purchasing the second. I got the macro first because 135 was just a little longer than I wanted for general shooting and I wanted the macro functionality... and I am thrilled with the macro for everything (great for portraiture IMO on FF), and it is a truly excellent lens, but I think it lacks that little sprinkle of magic that Canon seemed to sneak into the 135... now, I keep thinking, "when am I seriously going to choose the 135 over the 100 macro?" and then never buy the 135. It is also stopping me from buying an 85mm f1.8 since I am convince that the macro is a better lens... ah well... I guess not being lost in wanting is a good thing....Show more →
in fact, not to upset you or anything, it is exactly this indecision after the purchase which i am afraid of :) i will tell you then: the lenses i really want are the 24-105 f4L IS (for its walkaroundability), the 85 f1.2L (for portraits), the 100 f2.8 Macro (for macro, duh, and maybe some tight portraits too), and the 135 f2.0L as a sharp, light tele, and maybe some really tight portraits too.
then i want the 70-200 and the 100-400. i think. or maybe just a 200 and a 400... i am not sure about that yet, but i definitely want to have a great long tele one day, and zoom is handy. maybe i would just get a 300 instead, but you can see that since i haven't chosen/memorised the apertures of these last few, they come later, in my mind. the ones i want first are the first four, but i have a budget for two or three (well, not three of those three, just two), and the 24-105 will be the first one, first of all because there are good kit deals to be had, and secondly, because i will probably end up using it most of the time.
i kinda need at least one large-aperture lens to throw backgrounds out of focus, so i am thinking that the 100 would not be the right lens to get with the 24-105... okay, i just answered one question of my own there. getting the 24-105 and the 85 as the first two is a bit limiting, at least initially, so perhaps the 24-105 and the 135 are really the best two, as first lenses. then since the macro lens is fairly cheap compared to the others, it could follow a few months later, leaving the 85 in case i ever get really serious about portraiture. oh, and the 200 is a wild card, sitting on the sideline the whole time. it might sneak in before or after the 100 macro. i guess it depends on what direction my photography takes.
i am kinda coming full circle here. my first personal camera was an olympus om2n, then an om4, then the hassie, then a coolpix 990, then the sony f828, and now i am lining up the 5D (although i am trying to wait until hearing about the new 20D first, because the 5D price might drop a bit then). so with the 5D i can probably do very similar photography to what i did in the olympus om2n/om4 days, and it will have to stop there, since i have no cash for a digital back for the hasselblad :)
am i making a mistake somewhere in my logic?
|
