Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 01 Oct 2010 (Friday) 11:16
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Which macro: EF 100mm f/2.8L or 100mm/2.8

 
JayJay
Member
JayJay's Avatar
75 posts
Joined Nov 2009
France
Oct 01, 2010 11:16 |  #1

I'm trying to decide between which of the Canon macro 100mm lenses to choose.

The L is almost double the price but has IS and better quality. I want to use this lens to photograph flowers, insect life and jewellery, and as an added bonus, portraits. I'm really tempted to buy the non-L and put the rest towards a secondhand full frame body, but I would be interested to hear what others think.

JayJay


JayJay
Canon bodies: 50D, 5D
Canon lenses: EF 50mm f/1.4, EF L 17-40mm, EF 100mm macro, EF L 300 f4.0

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Shadowblade
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2008
Melbourne, Australia
Oct 01, 2010 11:17 |  #2

If you're shooting portraits as well, you'll benefit from the IS on the L version. Otherwise, they're pretty similar - the L is a tiny bit sharper at f/2.8 and is weather-sealed, but that's just about it.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Katalyst
Senior Member
Katalyst's Avatar
811 posts
Joined Feb 2010
The Netherlands
Oct 01, 2010 11:21 |  #3

I had the same problem as you and I went for the non L version, as you said it saves almost half the money and if you're going to shoot portraits I'd use a tripod anyway!




LOG IN TO REPLY
shmoogy
Senior Member
505 posts
Joined Dec 2009
Chicago
Oct 01, 2010 12:41 |  #4

Katalyst wrote in post #11014642external link
I had the same problem as you and I went for the non L version, as you said it saves almost half the money and if you're going to shoot portraits I'd use a tripod anyway!

I had the same ideas as you and I went for the L version.

Shooting portraits with a tripod is too much work if you're out and about, and being able to shoot at 1/30 shutter speed was worthwhile for me. The IS isn't all that great for macro purposes.

That being said, I don't really enjoy using it for portraiture, so I will toss in a consideration of 100 non-L for macro, and Rokinon 85 1.4 for portraiture, all for cheaper than the L version.


5D Mark II, 35L, 24 TS-E, 50 1.8
Canon 1000D

LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
ben_r_'s Avatar
15,875 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Sacramento, CA
Oct 01, 2010 12:46 |  #5

Since I use my 70-200 2.8 IS II for portraits I never use my 100 macro for that purpose. I have owned both the 100mm macros, and ended up keeping my non-L. I didnt like the Hybrid IS system in the 100L. Sounded clunky and I didnt like how it flops around a bit inside the lens barrel when the lens is unmounted. I didnt like the build quality, IMO is was not up to L standards. As mentioned ealier, IS doesnt really help with macro photography if you use a flash, which I always do. I didnt like that I had to buy an additional $40 adapter to use the 100L with my MT-24EX flash. I didnt like that the 100L was not a standard filter size like 58mm or 77mm which ALL my other lenses match. And lastly, since the IQ for macro is very much the same, there was no gain in IQ from the 100L. Needless to say I returned the 100L and kept my non-L.


[Gear List | Flickrexternal link | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protectionexternal link /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
DreDaze's Avatar
16,942 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Joined Mar 2006
S.F. Bay Area
Oct 01, 2010 12:47 |  #6

buy the non L, and with your savings buy a flash...


Andre or Dre
gear list
flickr (external link)
my 366 for 2016 (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
ben_r_'s Avatar
15,875 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Sacramento, CA
Oct 01, 2010 12:48 |  #7

DreDaze wrote in post #11015156external link
buy the non L, and with your savings buy a flash...

+1 to that!


[Gear List | Flickrexternal link | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protectionexternal link /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

LOG IN TO REPLY
rjx
Goldmember
rjx's Avatar
2,667 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Santa Clara, California
Oct 01, 2010 15:47 as a reply to ben_r_'s post |  #8

Yeah, you need the flash for bug macro, and other types of macro.

You could also get the 85 1.8 for portraits, and a Kenko extension tube set for macro.

Tamron makes a 60mm f/2 macro which looks pretty nice and is a good portrait length on crop sensors.

Tamron also makes the nice 90mm 2.8 macro. Don't forget Sigma's macro offerings.

I purchased the non L 100mm macro since imo the IS is a waste of money for most macro purposes.


"It doesn't matter what camera you have if your photography has nothing worthwhile to say"
“Photos are everywhere. You just have to know how to look.”

LOG IN TO REPLY
JayJay
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
JayJay's Avatar
75 posts
Joined Nov 2009
France
Oct 02, 2010 06:20 |  #9

many thanks for so much considered advice. I've made my decision now, the Non L it will be, plus the flash. merci!


JayJay
Canon bodies: 50D, 5D
Canon lenses: EF 50mm f/1.4, EF L 17-40mm, EF 100mm macro, EF L 300 f4.0

LOG IN TO REPLY
Peacefield
Goldmember
Peacefield's Avatar
4,022 posts
Joined Jul 2008
NJ
Oct 02, 2010 09:54 |  #10

I never pulled the trigger on the 100 macro until L and IS. Better IQ, IS to help when I do macro w/o a tripod (which is most of the time), and I appreciate the lighter weight.


Robert Wayne Photographyexternal link

5D3, 5D2, 50D, 350D * 16-35 2.8 II, 24-70 2.8 II, 70-200 2.8 IS II, 100-400 IS, 100 L Macro, 35 1.4, 85 1.2 II, 135 2.0, Tokina 10-17 fish * 580 EX II (3) Stratos triggers * Other Stuff plus a Pelican 1624 to haul it all

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1,242 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which macro: EF 100mm f/2.8L or 100mm/2.8
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.81668 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.88s
Latest registered member is AlexPetrenko
1168 guests, 560 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016