Hi everyone, just wanted to get some opinions. I had a good quarter and I am looking to purchase a new lens. Which do you think is more fun and more versitile - the 135 mm f/2.0 L or the 100 mm f/2.8 L Macro IS?


I don't have an absolutely tightly defined use for the lens or a pressing need. Just looking for something to add to what I got already, which is:


t1i, 50 mm f/1.8, 17 mm f/4.0 L, 70-200 mm f/4.0 L.


From what I have read and understand, the 135 mm is awesome for indoor sports/events and when there there is enough space, great for portraits. The 100 mm is pretty good too but might not be as awesome in as the 135 mm in terms of IQ. But it does open up the ability for macro which might be fun.


My subjects so far are mainly my 5 year daughter and soon will be our 2nd daughter which we are expecting in August. My 5 year old does do some dance which is the reason I first considered the 135 mm. I am wondering if the 100 mm will be good enough for the same purpose? In other words, is having the added macro option compelling enough argument to compromise my indoor event shooting?


Truth be told, I hope to own both the lens eventually. Just wondering which one I should get 1st or (here comes a can of worms) do I scrap this whole idea and get the 24-105 mm f/4.0 L IS and solve the gap between my 17-40 and 70-200.