Canon Short Tele Prime - Which to get?

JLateralus

I'm really having a hard time deciding between a couple of lenses.

First off, I shoot a lot indoors with low available light. As such, I'd like to get a nice wide aperture. My budget isn't very big, so that leaves me mostly with primes.

I like the 100mm focal length, so I'm thinking about the Canon 100mm f/2.0 USM. I think it would be a nice complement to my 50mm f/1.8 (which I love). I'd possibly be open to the 85mm f/1.8 as well, but I think that the 100mm would be more different from the 50mm than the 85mm would be.

My decision is really between the 100mm mentioned above and then the 100mm f/2.8 macro. I'd like the versatility to be able to shoot macro if I wanted, but the primary focus of the lens would be available light candid portrait style photos. Would the macro be good for this? I'm losing a stop of light, but gaining macro... tough decision!

Also, is the non-USM version of the macro lens as sharp as the newer USM version? I'm assuming that the focus speed is slower, which might also be a turn off for the primary use for the lens. My budget is about $400, and I think I can find the non-USM version for that if I decide to go the macro route...

Any comments or suggestions are appreciated!

divamum

I can't speak to the 100 2.8 macro, but I've had two copies of the 85 1.8 and 1 of the 100 2.0.

All things being equal, I preferred my 100 f2. It's sharper at 2.0 than the 85 is at 1.8 and at the time I needed the extra reach. I've now gone back to the 85 1.8 simply because I have a 135 f2 and the 100 was a redundant focal length. The 85 is a fine lens, but I still think I preferred the 100; maybe I just had a supersharp copy of it.

There are more similarities between the lenses than differences, however, so pick the focal length you prefer and go from there. For low light and/or portrait shooting, you can't really beat either of them for the money - they're both great lenses.

JLateralus

Thanks for the input. Everything I've seen / read about the 100 f/2 is excellent. I think I'm going to go with that one. Now to just get a deal.

quark

I have the 85 1.8 and the 100 mm macro (non-USM). I love them both, but the macro tends to be sharper all other things being equal. I find myself mostly using the macro because I like the DOF for portraits unless low light is really a problem, then the 85 comes out of the bag.

No bad choices here ....