Canon STM Lenses

[Dave Mercer]

I'm thinking about upgrading to the C100 Mk2.

Much of the work I do is run and gun, working on my own (news and docs). The AF / face-detection on the Mk2 looks very attractive, but appears only to work with STM lenses (of which I have exactly zero).

Two interesting ones are:

18-135mm EF-S

24-105mm EF

Same aperture, similar price. One's EF, the other EF-S. But 18-135 has more useable range (particularly of interest for me on the wide end, as my current go to lens is the 17-55 f2.8).

Any words of advice on optics, feel of lenses, etc, to help me decide?

Also, the new 100-400 USM II looks very interesting. I currently have the cheapy 70-300, and recently used the 70-200 2.8 for a week on my C100 Mk1. The 70-200 was a huge step up optically, and useability-wise.

Many thanks!

[Gary Huff]

The benefit of the 24-105 will be that you'll be able to use them on Full Frame cameras, such as the 5D, if that need ever arises. I don't think you can even mount an EF-S lens on the 5D.

Since they have the same aperture ramp (from 3.5 to 5.6) the difference to you sounds like it will be the optical quality and usability. I've heard some great things about the 18-135, and it's definitely a great reach, so all things being equal, if you don't plan on needing to mount it to a full frame Canon stills camera, then the 18-135 might be for you. I would definitely check out some samples and reviews and see if you feel like the quality is up to your standards, comparing it to what you see out of that 17-55 and the 70-200 f/4 (and I love both of those).

[Michael Galvan]

I have both the EF-S 17-55 and the EF-S 18-135 STM lens for my C100 MII.

The EF-S 18-135 STM is a good all-around lens and provides silent fast autofocus with the camera. In addition, it activates the Face AF mode, which is great for tracking focus for interviews. Manual focus is meh, due to the "wire" focus ring.

Optics-wise, its ok. I do notice a difference between this and the 17-55 (which is great!). There definitely is less contrast on the 18-135.

And just FYI - the new EF 24-105 STM currently isn't supported on the C100 MII for the Face AF features, which is a shame.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Michael Galvan

And just FYI - the new EF 24-105 STM currently isn't supported on the C100 MII for the Face AF features, which is a shame.

That's a shame to hear, hopefully they fix that soon.

[Dave Mercer]

Thanks Michael.

How does the 18-135 compare to the 17-55 in terms of sharpness? Can you mix them both without too many tell-tale signs (aside from contrast)?

[Chris Hurd]

I have both of these lenses -- the 17-55 f/2.8 and the 18-135 STM -- and I'm surprised at how good the 18-135 is. Of course it's slower and not a constant aperture but in terms of sharpness it's actually pretty close to the 17-55 in my opinion. Although I have not actually mixed them though. I'm willing to bet the results would be good.

[Gary Huff]

One thing to keep in mind is that the C100 Mark II has an option to compensate for iris ramping when you zoom. I haven't personally tested it yet as I don't have any zooms that aren't a fixed aperture, but if the contrast difference doesn't bother you, the 18-135 may work out well on that particular camera because of that feature.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Michael Galvan

And just FYI - the new EF 24-105 STM currently isn't supported on the C100 MII for the Face AF features, which is a shame.

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

That's a shame to hear, hopefully they fix that soon.

I'm pretty sure that's just a simple matter of a firmware update. Coming soon, hopefully.

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

One thing to keep in mind is that the C100 Mark II has an option to compensate for iris ramping when you zoom.

Hell, I didn't even know that. I gotta start reading those press releases.

[Dave Mercer]

Thanks Gary and Chris. Sounds like a worthwhile investment.