85/2 and 100/4 Canon Serenars

MinorTones

Well-known
Local time
7:04 AM
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
298
Location
North Carolina
How do these two lenses perform? I have the choice between both at modest prices with their viewfinders and cases, but I want to choose only one.

Does anyone have some sample pics?

Here are some photos of the lenses. They both look pretty.

The 85/2 is the first. 100/4 is the second pic.

-Mitch
 

Attachments

  • s85.jpg
    s85.jpg
    32.6 KB · Views: 0
  • s100.jpg
    s100.jpg
    33.6 KB · Views: 0
Sounds good. I was hoping you'd weigh in on the subject Joe. I searced around on RFF and saw most posters swaying toward the 85/2.

What would you expect to pay for one in the condition of the photo above?

-Mitch
 
I love my 85/2 lens. I carry it all the time and use it when I need a longer lens than 35/50. It is quit sharp even wide open.

Leo
 
The 85/2 is a very good lens and it is fast. The 100's are very compact and portable. However, I think the 100/3.5 is a lot better than the 100/4. In your place I would get the 85 and wait for a 100/3.5 if you find you need a more compact short tele.

Kim
 
The 85/2 it is then. If I can get it under $200 I'll buy it. I dont use long lenses much, but I figure its good to have one or two at hand.

Long glass on an RF feels wierd to me. Looking through those small finder lines, I cant get a good sense of what the print will look like. Mostly because of the large depth of field, its hard to just imagine the OOF areas.

-Mitch
 
Go for the 85/2.

The 100/4 is heavier than it should be, a bit soft. It makes for a good portrait. It is a triplet design, replaced rather quickly with the 5-element 100/3.5. It is a pretty lens, and is on the collectible side. One in mint condition, with case and finder, will go for ~$100.
 
Back
Top Bottom