I would recommend the 100mm macro. I only have the non-L version, but I can imagine the characteristics. A 135L looks pretty great to me, but personally I think you're better of with the 100mm macro. It's a great lens. Good image-quality. Nice depth of field. Good bokeh. A very good IS-system. The ability of macro-photography, which is really awesome! And to be honest, a 5-year old dancer is easy to capture inside with f2.8 [] It's not like they move so fast like they will be doing later in their careers [:P]


Quote Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
I have theEF 100mm f/2.8<span style="color:red;"]LMacro IS lens, and it really is a fun lens. Do you have a good tripod/head? You'll definitely need that to 'open up the ability for macro'.

Could you show me some great macro-photos with the use of a tripod? I can't understand what is so important about it. My subjects all move to fast to even consider using a tripod... Even the smallest movement on such magnification results in a blur, not to mention the wind blowing againts the leaves they are on etc. I could understand a IS-flash combination though, but a tripod looks to static to me.


Quote Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
If you really want to capture your daughter's dancing, you'll want something at f/2

I still believe it could be done with "only" f2.8, I've seen someone shooting pretty great photos at a kickboxing game with a 200mm 2.8L this weekend, and to be honest I think you'll be just fine with a shutterspeed of about 1/200 for 5-year olds..


Just kick me if I'm wrong [A]


Jan