Canon LTM 100mm Canon F/2 How best to test?

[Sonnar2]

Then take the 100/3.5 instead... 🙂

 

[squinza]

Then take the 100/3.5 instead... 🙂

I have both 🙄
I always carry the 3.5, it's so small!

 

[Sonnar2]

Excellent! :-8
The 100/2 is a luxury.
You seldom need the speed, but if you do, the lens is not *too* heavy, when compared with others. I found that the size advantage of the black 85/1.8 doesn't matter (and with most Canon bodies the 100mm is a better choice).
For some reasons a sharp 100/2 lens seem to need certain volume. The Canon has the same size as the Olympus OM 100/2, which performance is comparable. The Komura 100/1.8 is smaller thanks to Ernostar but not as contrasty. My oppinion is that the Canon 100/2 and 85/1.8 are the first "modern" (means: size and weight optimized) Gaussian telephoto lenses in history.

 

[raid]

Life is too short to worry about lenses that went away.
Enjoy your Canon 100/2, and show us more results.

 

[Bill58]

I used to have a 100/ 3.5 black and got rid of it because the only use I had for it was filming performers on stage (at night) that were constantly moving and I couldn't keep it in focus. I got rid of it and bought an 85/1.8 black just for portraits. I also have an Jupiter 9 85 Russian too. 85mm is the practical, upper limit for my RF lenses.

 

[Bill58]

Well, sharp is sharp, but a little heavy for my taste....

Untitled by Il conte di Luna, on Flickr

That's sharp!

 

[squinza]

You guys tempted me into using it again.
This is f/4

Voga by Il conte di Luna, on Flickr

It is not so big, after all...

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

It is not so big, after all...

Agreed, it seems to grow in my imagination whenever I'm not using it.

 

[Nokton48]

This Just Arrived From Japan.

This Just Arrived From Japan.

My new 100mm F2, mounted on my new (second) Sony Nex-3.

Very nice combo. I will be using this one alot.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

My only complaint with the 100/2 is the single helicoid which has no effect on IQ.

True, it is rather vexing to have to hunt for the aperture ring.

 

[raid]

There are several high quality tele lenses that can be used. The Canon 100/2 is one of them. Is it somehow superior to the Nikon 105/2.5? I doubt it.

 

[uhoh7]

There are several high quality tele lenses that can be used. The Canon 100/2 is one of them. Is it somehow superior to the Nikon 105/2.5? I doubt it.

What's to doubt? It's faster, sharp wide open and does not weigh any more (could be lighter) than the nikon RF 105--which of course is not the same lens as the newer SLR 105.

 

[raid]

What's to doubt? It's faster, sharp wide open and does not weigh any more (could be lighter) than the nikon RF 105--which of course is not the same lens as the newer SLR 105.

The Nikon 105 is very sharp wide open. The Sonnar design Nikkor is a pleasure to use.

 

[ampguy]

I like the Nikon too

I like the Nikon too

the 105//2.5 works great on the NEX but for me, the fl. is a bit long. 57/1.4 is about the longest I use regularly. I carry the kit 16 all the time, as it's so small and light, but rarely use it. Mainly using the 40 Hexanon AR pancake, CV 21/4, and J3 50/1.5, and 57/1.4 Hexanon AR.

The Nikon 105 is very sharp wide open. The Sonnar design Nikkor is a pleasure to use.

 

[Nokton48]

What's to doubt? It's faster, sharp wide open and does not weigh any more (could be lighter) than the nikon RF 105--which of course is not the same lens as the newer SLR 105.

I'd much rather have an F2 lens rather than F2.5 especially since it's quite sharp wide-open.

This is a great lens in my opinion. Other than size and weight (which are not factors for me), what's not to like?

 

[uhoh7]

I think there is no doubt the 105 is great, I'd like to have one too 🙂

but better than a canon 100/2?

no way. the 105 was produced in large numbers, but less so the 100/2, and the 105 inherits it's newer cousin's reputation, so it's a really well known lens.

but the 100/2 and the 85/1.8 canons are canon's masterpieces technically. Both designed by the really famous guy.....