100mm, 135mm or 200mm?

[Nurcahyo]

I have looked and tried these three L-lenses, and got a brief feel for them. Recently had a 70-200 4.0 in my possession but sold it. How would you compare the 70-200 4.0 to these three gentlemen?

I'm in the business of buying a light weight lens for full frame. (the none-L versions are not interresting due to weather sealing, also I want my equipment to being able to take a beating). I will not shoot sport but having a little extra reach from my 24-70 and to being able to compress the background a little more.

[colin C]

Re: 100mm, 135mm or 200mm?

For me it would be the 200mm.

You can get the view of a 100mm, or a 135mm, by taking a few steps forward with your 24 - 70mm. So not only is the 200mm a great lens, but it make an appreciable difference to your view, enough to warrant a lens change.

Colin

[J H Foto]

Re: 100mm, 135mm or 200mm?

I agree with Colin............

[Nurcahyo]

100mm, 135mm or 200mm?

Sounds logical to me, is it possible to use a 2x or 1.4x extender with the 200mm? Packing light is one of my main goals here :)

[Bawbee]

Re: 100mm, 135mm or 200mm?

It is compatible with both extenders; whichever version is applied. See one of amy charts at Wikipedia - Clicky

[Nurcahyo]

100mm, 135mm or 200mm?

It is compatible with both extenders; whichever version is applied. See one of amy charts at Wikipedia - Clicky

Thanks! I'll check it out!

I don't have a lot knowledge on prime telephoto lenses. Will an extender do anything with the image IQ?