| Year | 1973 |
| Lens Groups | 5 |
| Lens Element | 5 |
| Aperature Blades | 8 |
| Minimum Aperture | f/22 |
| Closest Focusing | 1. m |
| Max. Magnifcation | 1:7.7 (0.13x) |
| Filter Size | 55 mm |
| Diameter x Length | 67 x 57.0 mm |
| Weight | 360 gr (0.79 lb) |
| Hood | BT-55 |
This really is my best friend for certain purposes. Not only portrait, but in this respect I did not find a better lens.
Like most older lenses: get it cleaned inside and you will be amazed. And again like most older lenses: not weatherproof at all.
I started out with a Canon FTb with a 50mm f1.8, an FD 35mm f3.5 and a Canon FD 135 f2.5. Of the three I like the normal the best (I still have it, in part because it's a chrome ring model). Second was the mild wide angle, which I liked, though I did with it was an f2.8 instead of a 3.5. The one I liked the least was the 135 f2.5, and this lens was supposed to have the best reputation of them all. I found it big, heavy and awkward to use, largely because I wanted to take portraits. A carry over in FD form from the previous FL model, it was a good solid sharp lens, that well I didn't like it much. So one day I asked a professor of mine who was also an amateur photography what I could do to get rid of it. "Give it to me," he said, when I explained what lens I really wanted. So, I did and soon there after he gave me a nearly new Canon FD 100mm f2.8. I gave him twenty-five dollars and I've had that lens until I gave it and several other lenses from my collection to my son. However, I still have another 100 f2.8 which I use with the EF I have, so I've never really done without one for over 40 years. Why have I kept it. Well, for one thing it isn't that much bigger than my 50mm. Secondly the f2.8 aperture is big enough to produce a good out of focus background to isolate the subject. Finally, it is sharp. Add it's sturdy build and good looks and that is more than enough for me. Over the years, I've used it for countless head to shoulders portraits. It was also my macro lens when I would use an extension tube to help it focus closer. What more can I say, small, but not too small, versatile and sharp, it's no wonder I've had an affection for this lens all these years. Good shooting to all.
Used this lens on NEX 5N camera, this is a one perfect 100mm. It has very good resolution and contrast right from the start @2.8, no noticeable distortions or abberations, no color casts. Very good for portrait work. The lens is also light and small. Highly recommended.
DAS zweitbeste Objektiv, dass ich je hatte . . .
SCHARF !
HOCHAUFLÖSEND !
. . . eigentlich ein "L" . . . !!!!
I bought this lens for a great price from a used online retailer (www.cameta.com). It was smaller in length than I had anticipated and has the feel of solid construction.
I wish it focused more closely, but I guess that's why they make macro lenses. Also I find the 55mm filter thread to be an odd size. So many of Canon's lenses are either 52mm or 58mm that I find 55mm to be inconvenient, requiring either a step-down ring or new filters.
Since this is a newer lens to me, it hasn't taken the abuse that my 20mm and 50mm have, but it appears up to the task. I hope to find many future uses for it.