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
Guest
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 Dec 2015 (Tuesday) 12:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF 100/2.8 macro IS and EF 100/2

 
eddieb1
Senior Member
Avatar
754 posts
Likes: 131
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Oregon
     
Dec 01, 2015 12:44 |  #1

Does it make sense to keep both of these lenses? I have a friend that has both, and swears it makes perfect sense. I think he feels that the 100/2.8, being a macro, is not very capable in other areas. Opinions?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,499 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4787
Joined Sep 2007
     
Dec 01, 2015 13:05 |  #2

yes it does, they are different tools.

same question can be asked whether or not to keep the 85 1.8 + macro or 135 f2 + macro. The macro can get close to either lens....

something like the Zeiss 100 MP is much more appealing in specs. 100mm f2 + 1:2 macros. I would have kept it if it werent so heavy.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
28,993 posts
Likes: 967
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 01, 2015 13:26 |  #3

It depends a bit on how he is using the 100f2. If he's simply using it as a portrait lens then no. But if he uses it for anything where focus speed is a factor then having both can be critical. I probably wouldn't have gone with 2 100 mm lenses (I have the 85 1.8 and 135L) but the 100f2 is a good lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cameron ­ Hagen
Senior Member
Avatar
287 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 65
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Cypress, TX
     
Dec 01, 2015 13:50 |  #4

gonzogolf wrote in post #17803406 (external link)
It depends a bit on how he is using the 100f2. If he's simply using it as a portrait lens then no. But if he uses it for anything where focus speed is a factor then having both can be critical. I probably wouldn't have gone with 2 100 mm lenses (I have the 85 1.8 and 135L) but the 100f2 is a good lens.

i agree. it all depends on how youre using each lens. I as well have the 85/1.8 and the 135/2


| 5Dc | 7D | 1D3 | 1Ds3 | 17-40 4.0 | 28 1.8 | 40 2.8 | 50 1.8 | 85 1.8 | 135 2.0 | ∑ 24-70 | ∑ 70-200 OS |
In need of : 300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,840 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 557
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
Post edited over 2 years ago by johnf3f.
     
Dec 01, 2015 16:44 |  #5

Horses for courses.
If you do Macro with a bit of landscape/ portraiture then the Canon 100 F2.8 L is the tool for the job. If your interests lie in the portraiture genre or general/landscape uses then the 100 F2 is the lens of choice.
The 100 F2, with extension tubes, will do a good job at macro photography but it is a compromise - the 100 F2.8 L isn't. The 100 F2.8 L IS will take great portraits but the 100 F2 can take better ones. For landscapes both are excellent.
Decide on your priorities and then buy - they are both great lenses - just a little different in their uses/aperture.


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,672 posts
Gallery: 1080 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7953
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 01, 2015 17:38 |  #6

Heya,

Depends on uses.

I had three 85mm lenses at one point, for different purposes. I eventually reduced it down to an 85mm F1.4 and a 90mm F2.8 VC macro. They're different enough for me to warrant both. But I didn't keep my 85mm F1.8, because it just didn't do enough that my other two were not already handling.

The 100 F2.8L and 100 F2 are similar in many ways, but ultimately I'd keep the 100L over the 100 F2 for a "general" lens. To me, the aperture difference isn't enough to warrant losing the IS and the L optics. The focus speed is not lightning on the 100L, so if you're doing critical action, that's where the 100 F2 comes in as it has very fast AF. If I needed a lens with fast, really fast, autofocus, the 85 F1.8, 100 F2 and 135L are the ones I'd go for in those ranges. For other purposes, I'd probably just go down to one lens and keep the 100L.

I went through it as mentioned above and let my 85 F1.8 go, and kept my 90 F2.8 VC. It doesn't focus as fast, but it focuses fast enough that it keeps up with a 2 year old that runs in low light, so I realized I didn't need the faster AF ability of the 85 F1.8 and let it go. My 85 F1.4 is significantly different, and manual focus, so that one I keep.

Comes down to use.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)
For sale: Sekonic Litemaster L-478D (Free Shipping)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
5,712 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 2623
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
Dec 01, 2015 17:43 |  #7

For me, no.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - 18-55 - 23/35/50 f2 WR - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,511 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
Dec 01, 2015 18:07 |  #8

John above said it best - "The 100 F2.8 L IS will take great portraits but the 100 F2 can take better ones.". I have used both lenses and this is correct. For macro and anywhere you need IS, the macro is obviously the best. The F/2 is without a doubt better for portraits. The only lens better for portraits in this price range is the 135mm F/2.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,672 posts
Gallery: 1080 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 7953
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 01, 2015 18:14 |  #9

Heya,

The 100 F2 is not better for portraits. That's assuming one has to have the thinnest depth of field and be used outdoors with wide distance backgrounds for it to be a "better portrait lens" and that's just way short sighted in a genre like portraiture.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)
For sale: Sekonic Litemaster L-478D (Free Shipping)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,840 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 557
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Dec 01, 2015 18:26 as a reply to  @ nightcat's post |  #10

That's what I was getting at - you just put it better!


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,499 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4787
Joined Sep 2007
     
Dec 01, 2015 18:30 |  #11

MalVeauX wrote in post #17803789 (external link)
Heya,

The 100 F2 is not better for portraits. That's assuming one has to have the thinnest depth of field and be used outdoors with wide distance backgrounds for it to be a "better portrait lens" and that's just way short sighted in a genre like portraiture.

Very best,

Having that F2 option does make it better for portraits. It is an option to shoot f2, not a requirement of course.

it's like comparing the 85f1.2 to 85f1.8, the stop is fairly significant if you're going after a certain look.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,511 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
Dec 01, 2015 18:49 as a reply to  @ MalVeauX's post |  #12

No, you don't always have to have the thinnest depth of field. Most of the portraits I take with this lens are stopped down to 2.8 or F/4. I would say only 30-35% of the portraits I take with the F/2 lens are wide open, but when F/2 is needed, it's there. You can't say the same about the macro which only goes to 2.8. To me, more options are a benefit. When I have the F/2 lens with me, I can shoot at every aperture that the macro can provide, plus 2.2 and 2.0. This option makes it a better and more versatile portrait lens. I think most professional portrait photographers would agree.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
28,993 posts
Likes: 967
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 01, 2015 19:46 |  #13

Charlie wrote in post #17803804 (external link)
Having that F2 option does make it better for portraits. It is an option to shoot f2, not a requirement of course.

it's like comparing the 85f1.2 to 85f1.8, the stop is fairly significant if you're going after a certain look.

That's not a fair comparison there is more than just max aperture separating those two lenses.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,417 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 336
Joined Sep 2011
     
Dec 01, 2015 20:54 |  #14

I have the 85/1.8, 100L and 135/2. I'd probably trade the 100/2 in for the 85/1.8 if I had just bought the 100L just to differentiate a little.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,783 posts
Likes: 193
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Traryd, Sweden
     
Dec 02, 2015 09:27 |  #15

gonzogolf wrote in post #17803886 (external link)
That's not a fair comparison there is more than just max aperture separating those two lenses.

Like the price tag... ;-)a


Anders

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

3,727 views & 1 like for this thread
EF 100/2.8 macro IS and EF 100/2
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Lisann
829 guests, 364 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.