Sold my 100m and picked up a 180 and regretting it... opinions?

[DeCeccoNET]

So in preperation of my 5Dmk2, I pretty much got bit by the L bug as you can see from my sig...

Having enjoyed macro photography over the past several months, I figured I would "upgrade" my 100 to the 180L... My main concern was having the additional working distance (I previously had the efs 60m and the spiders were practically shaking my hands I had to be so close).

The 180L a BIG beautiful lens, but also much more of a hassel to use. It takes up so much space/weight in my bag, its a little harder for me to justify bringing it when I may not use it. (Also, having to use the adapter thread for my MT-24 is annoying to no end).

I am still within a return window for the 180, and the macro is still on rebate for another week, I am thinking of switching back.


Has anyone else ever taken a similar plunge away from the 100 macro only to return later?

Please note that I do want to stick with Canon brand lenses no matter what I end up doing.

Thanks!

[brecklundin]

I have the Sigma 180 so I know what you mean about the 180mm Macros being somewhat unwieldy beasties! Still for me I like the added reach if I want to use it as a prime. I have had mine a while and to be honest I am not 100% comfortable hand holding it yet. But I am keeping it simply because it really does a great job.

My opinion though would be if you don't feel like you can handle it w/o thinking twice, heck return it and go back to the 100 or consider the Sigma 150 but it's not an "L" and ya do lose the sealing. You get a bit more working distance though.

[LordV]

The only advantage the longer lens has is better bokeh and slightly longer focus distances. Optically it's not as sharp as the 100mm or 60mm. I think the handling is a big disadvantage. I'd send it back and get the 100mm.
Brian V.

[DeCeccoNET]

Returned and ordered... I really miss my 100macro :(

Quick question though...

On my 40D I never found myself using the hood as I would typically use the MT-24 instead. Would a hood be more necessary in full frame however? could i get away with say leaving the MT-24's macro light adapter attached instead?

[brecklundin]

hahaha...good for you...I know I miss a lens ao sold a few months back and will be buying another soon enough. So, I kinda know what you are feeling. :D

As far as a hood...ummm, why would the body the lens is mounted on matter if one uses a hood or not? It's not like the body has anything to do with the optics of the lens, right? Or no? ??? ;)

[DeCeccoNET]

As far as a hood...ummm, why would the body the lens is mounted on matter if one uses a hood or not? It's not like the body has anything to do with the optics of the lens, right? Or no? ??? ;)

On my 40D, I dont think I ever felt I needed the hood, especially since I almost always used the macro with my MT-24.

On the 5Dmk2, I am assuming that since I am using full frame, as opposed to a crop body, vignetting/flare would be more of an issue in which case I would be better off picking up a hood again. That being said, if I simpley clip on the macro light adapter, will that provide adequate protection against glare? (obviously it wont be as long as the standard hood)

[brecklundin]

ahhhhh...thanks I would never have thought of it that way. Rookie error and I appreciate your helping me understand. I keep forgetting there is a difference between FF and CF bodies.

Still, I would think there would not be an issue since this lens is supposed an EF...though my favorite lens review site does not mention if they test with the hood or not...

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/157/cat/10

But from the charts vignetting is essentially non-existant, if I read the charts correctly that is...been up all night playing in PS so, well, I am feeling a tad goofy about now...hehehehe...

BTW, congrats on grabbing a new 5d MkII while they are hot...sure looks like a keeper.

[DeCeccoNET]

BTW, congrats on grabbing a new 5d MkII while they are hot...sure looks like a keeper.


Thanks! It certinally is a keeper, and it was also a big wakeup call in terms what lenses i use to shoot....


My tales of woe in short...

I made the mistake of selling my efs lenses and 40D and replaceing them with 2.8L lenses where appropreate (16-35/24-70) without considering the 5Dmk2's low light performance.

While the 16-35 was beautiful, I started doing tests at f/4 and high isos and found that I was very happy with the results. The 24-70 in truth I never cared for at all. So back to Amazon they go (yay for no re-stocking fee!) and I ordered the highly regarded 17-40L & 24-105L (and less expensive).

Then I decided to go back to my old 2.8 macro (which was my favorite lens), hence the start of this thread.

Now, I am considering ditching the 70-200 2.8IS to go back to the smaller lighter f/4IS which I absolutely LOVED except when shooting indoor sports (which I rarely do anyway).

85L... Beautiful, VERY expensive hardely ever use. I actually regretted this from day one. I thought I would shoot more protraits with it, but it never worked out that way. Its fast, but so was my old 85 1.8 (which focused MUCH faster). I am planning on selling it, and picking up the 135 2.0 L so I have a fast indoor lens that can do portraits and sports (it is supposed to be able to focus VERY fast).

When all is said and done, I will have the 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f4IS, 100-400L (my second favorite lens!), 100 Macro & 135L

More importantly, I will also have about $2000 more in my bank account :)

[Lester Wareham]

Returned and ordered... I really miss my 100macro :(

Quick question though...

On my 40D I never found myself using the hood as I would typically use the MT-24 instead. Would a hood be more necessary in full frame however? could i get away with say leaving the MT-24's macro light adapter attached instead?

Tip: When doing closeup work by ambient light I use the hood designed for the EF-S 60mm macro on my 100mm macro. It fits fine but is much shorter than the correct hood for the 100mm.

I would always use a hood with the 100mm (if not using flash) as the front element is very exposed to stray light.

[airdima]

not that i have experience with one but from just observing i don't see myself investing in a 180mm lens, if anything i'll save up for a 300mm F4 which works wonderfully with a TC and is good for large size insects to fill the frame with

[Lester Wareham]

not that i have experience with one but from just observing i don't see myself investing in a 180mm lens, if anything i'll save up for a 300mm F4 which works wonderfully with a TC and is good for large size insects to fill the frame with

I use my 300/4 IS like that also, often with 25 or 37mm of tubes.

[DeCeccoNET]

UPDATE: My 100/macro is home! And I am never letting it out of my sight again :)

[Lester Wareham]

Enjoy your (new) old friend.