Canon EF 100mm F/2.8L Macro IS USM vs Canon EF 135mm F/2L USM — Which Is Better?

The Canon EF 100mm F/2.8L Macro IS USM and the Canon EF 135mm F/2L USM are both L-series prime lenses for Canon EOS full-frame bodies, but they serve different assignments. The 2009 100mm is built around life-size close-up work, while the 1996 135mm is a fast telephoto for portraits and low-light subjects at distance.

The 100mm is the lighter lens for carrying, at 1 lb 6 oz (625 g) against 1 lb 10.5 oz (750 g) for the 135mm, a 125 g difference. It is also the slimmer barrel at 78 mm against 83 mm, though the 135mm is shorter at 112 mm against 123 mm.

A difference in filter threads matters for anyone building a filter kit: the 100mm takes 67 mm filters directly and the 135mm takes 72 mm, so they need different direct-fit sizes.

The 100mm is the clear choice for filling the frame with small subjects. It reaches 1x magnification and focuses to 1 ft (30 cm), while the 135mm stops at 0.19x and focuses no closer than 3 ft (90 cm). For flowers, product shots and insects, that gap decides the purchase.

The 135mm is stronger for working distance and dim venues. Its f/2 aperture opens wider than the 100mm's f/2.8, and its 135 mm focal length is 35 percent longer, suiting headshots, stage work and candid portraits across a room.

The 100mm gives you freedom to shoot handheld and in poor weather. It offers image stabilization rated at 4 stops and weather sealing for rain and dust, while the 135mm offers neither.

The 135mm answers with teleconverter compatibility, letting you extend its reach on days when 135 mm is not long enough. Neither lens has a fluorine coating on the front element.

This is a difference in optical formula: the 100mm uses 15 elements in 12 groups, against 10 elements in 8 groups for the 135mm. In a shared design choice, each includes one low-dispersion element and no aspherical elements.

This is a similarity in focusing design: neither lens uses internal focusing, and both do without a floating element system.