100 2.8 macro vs. 185 3.5

[ifurlong]

is the canon 185 macro lens a lot better (sharper or whatever means better for macro) than the canon 100 macro lens? thanks, Ian.

[lightandlife]

If my memory serves me right, the latter is the only Canon macro L lens. It should be better than the former. I have used only the latter and were very satisfied with it.

[lightandlife]

Here is an example of Macro shot of a small jade carving.

http://www.pbase.com/image/20904339

[Roger_Cavanagh]

Unfortunately, I don't have either the 100 or 180 macros, but I have paid attention because they are both on my wish list. :)

The 180 is an L lens and, therefore, would be expected to be better quality. It is after all nearly twice the price. The longer focal length would have the definite advantage of a longer working distance than the shorter lens. The 100 does have an extra half-stop aperture, but most of the time you should use a tripod for macro work, so I wouldn't think the difference would be more than trivial.

I've seen plenty of posted pictures from both lenses, and they both give excellent results, but, if you can afford it, the 180 does, IMO, give better results.

Regards,

[GPR1]

I own the 100, and it is very sharp. I'm sure the L lens is sharper (I haven't looked at the charts), but my wallet could afford the 100, and I haven't been disappointed.

[ifurlong]

yes, I have the 100 now and I like it, I was just wondering, thanks.

[MediaMagic]

Yeah, what I can't believe is how expensive those canon macro flash units are. Sheesh. The cost of a lens. I suppose next there will be L flashes using L glass for the light to pass through.. You know, L glass covering the Pilot and charge indicators for sharper visual confirmation. Then we'd be at $1200 for a flash easily.

:-)

[ifurlong]

yeah, actually I am in the process of making my own macro flash, theirs no way I am paying 700 fo a flash

[cowman345]

I **LOVE** my 100mm 2.8 macro. I've never owned a better lens, that's for sure. I've never owned L glass, but this lens tops all the other mid-price-ranged canon zooms I've used in sharpness.

-dave-

[lightandlife]

If possible, do the macro work during the day and save money.

Daylight is the perfect flash. No matter how much one spends on a flash, it cannot duplicate the sunlight.

[Belmondo]

I JUST bought the 100 2.8 a couple days ago, and with the exception of the few moments in the store when I played with it on an Elan body, I've done absolutely nothing with it. In fact, I'm sitting here at my desk looking at it on the floor next to me, still in the box.

Hopefully I'll get a chance to take it outdoors this afternoon and 'consummate' the relationship. If anything worthwhile comes of it, I'll post it.

[scottbergerphoto]

belmondo wrote:
I JUST bought the 100 2.8 a couple days ago, and with the exception of the few moments in the store when I played with it on an Elan body, I've done absolutely nothing with it. In fact, I'm sitting here at my desk looking at it on the floor next to me, still in the box.

Hopefully I'll get a chance to take it outdoors this afternoon and 'consummate' the relationship. If anything worthwhile comes of it, I'll post it.


Don't feel bad. Millions of people bought Pet Rocks.

[Belmondo]

Not me. I was always afraid they'd multiply, and who wants Pet Gravel?

And who wants a relationship with something that's always stoned?

Love my lenses, though.