Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
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 07 Jul 2013 (Sunday) 17:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF-100mm f/2.8 vs. f/2.8L IS

 
gasrocks
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,431 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Portage, Wisconsin USA
     
Jul 08, 2013 12:45 |  #16

Isn't it interesting how we all shoot differrently. I teach a class in macro photogrpahy. No tripods or flash allowed.


GEAR LIST
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Jul 08, 2013 13:29 |  #17

gasrocks wrote in post #16101974 (external link)
Isn't it interesting how we all shoot differrently. I teach a class in macro photogrpahy. No tripods or flash allowed.

Ignoring tools instead of educating people on when to and not to use a tool is a bit of a disservice to your students, don't you think?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flickserve
Senior Member
835 posts
Joined Sep 2007
Location: H.K.
     
Jul 08, 2013 22:06 |  #18

vengence wrote in post #16102109 (external link)
Ignoring tools instead of educating people on when to and not to use a tool is a bit of a disservice to your students, don't you think?

Not conpletely convinced it is a disservice. I might view the course as a specialised one on handholding technique and refining it with more time on that. Later, I might go for another course that teaches more effective use of flash.

There can be courses to fit different needs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Jul 08, 2013 22:13 |  #19

flickserve wrote in post #16103471 (external link)
Not conpletely convinced it is a disservice. I might view the course as a specialised one on handholding technique and refining it with more time on that. Later, I might go for another course that teaches more effective use of flash.

There can be courses to fit different needs.

Teaching a course on handheld macro or flashless macro is one thing. Teaching a course on macro while ignoring tripods and flashes is another. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
warwoman
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
158 posts
Likes: 8
Joined May 2010
Location: In the Georgia Appalachians.
     
Jul 09, 2013 08:20 |  #20

vengence wrote in post #16103493 (external link)
Teaching a course on handheld macro or flashless macro is one thing. Teaching a course on macro while ignoring tripods and flashes is another. ;)

Man, who peed in your post toasties this morning?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paddler4
Goldmember
Avatar
1,319 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jul 09, 2013 09:34 |  #21

I don't think this argument helps the OP, although I agree with one side of it. The bottom line for the OP is this: if you are planning to do handheld, available light macro, the IS will help, although only by a stop and a half or at most two. If you are going to use flash to stop motion or a tripod, it won't help.

I do all three, depending on circumstances. For me, the IS has been a help.


Check out my photos at http://dkoretz.smugmug​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Jul 09, 2013 20:53 |  #22

warwoman wrote in post #16104325 (external link)
Man, who peed in your post toasties this morning?

No one, it's just a joke to say "well if there isn't enough light that you can't hand hold, even if you are a pro at it, you shouldn't take the photograph".




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frankk
Senior Member
825 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: NJ, USA
     
Jul 09, 2013 21:22 as a reply to  @ vengence's post |  #23

To the OP:

I think everyone's pointed out that the L has better build quality and that the deciding factor is the IS, but I want to emphasize something that Alan covered.

The new focus limiter options on the L are very helpful. I had the non-L and liked it a lot. I upgraded after borrowing a 100L from a friend (weekend trade for my 16-35ii). I really like the IS to cover for non-macro use, events where my big white lenses isn't appropriate. But for macro, I really benefit from the new, three stage limiter. When set properly, it significantly increases focus speed for both macro and close up.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ F ­ stops ­ here
Goldmember
Avatar
2,061 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2012
Location: San Jose, Ca
     
Jul 10, 2013 00:07 |  #24

Guess i'll jump in since the non L is one of my primary lenses, I've owned this lens twice. Sold my first one in favor of the L but changed my mind as they are virtually identical optically (silly to research this after the fact i know, live and learn).

The more i use this lens the more i learn just how versatile it is, whether on my 60D (where it lives most often) or on my 5D2. It all depends on your purpose and how often you think you are going to use it.

3 examples from the non L

IMAGE: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2846/9245577590_d61208392d_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/92455​77590/  (external link)
Greenbot6 (external link) by LenzFreak (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7407/9159186237_1cab4d99a4_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/91591​86237/  (external link)
Flower12 (external link) by LenzFreak (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3741/9153240027_6a598c2c4d_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/91532​40027/  (external link)
Hummingbird27 (external link) by LenzFreak (external link), on Flickr

No tripods here :D

JD
Talent will get you far, but not as far as ambition
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/ (external link)
Smugmug-primefocus.smugmug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KristyT2i
Member
Avatar
57 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Rome, Italy
     
Jul 10, 2013 00:24 |  #25

"image quality is the same"

Umm, no, it's not. Maybe if you're shooting at f/16+ it'll be identical. However, if you plan to use this lens for anything other than macro work and plan to shoot f/2.8, f/5.6, etc the MTF numbers are nowhere close to identical. The L is a lot sharper...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ F ­ stops ­ here
Goldmember
Avatar
2,061 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2012
Location: San Jose, Ca
     
Jul 10, 2013 00:34 |  #26

KristyT2i wrote in post #16106828 (external link)
"image quality is the same"

Umm, no, it's not. Maybe if you're shooting at f/16+ it'll be identical. However, if you plan to use this lens for anything other than macro work and plan to shoot f/2.8, f/5.6, etc the MTF numbers are nowhere close to identical. The L is a lot sharper...

I re-read the thread to see where anyone said "image quality is the same" and could not find such a quote, if you could point out who specifically said that it would be great.

Taking into consideration most folks won't be "pixel peeping" that closely i don't personally think the sharpness difference between the 2 lenses is really that critical. For a casual shooter the non L is more than sufficient in sharpness, i feel anyone looking to get that deep into macro would really be considering a MPE-65. Just sayin :)


JD
Talent will get you far, but not as far as ambition
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/ (external link)
Smugmug-primefocus.smugmug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kawi_200
Goldmember
1,411 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Stanwood, WA
     
Jul 10, 2013 00:41 |  #27

The non L is very very good. However I do really like the L for the IS and its build quality. I mostly traded up to the L for the weather sealing since I do plenty of hiking, and for the IS.


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i257.photobucke​t.com …0Help/MacroComp​arison.jpg (external link)

5D4 | 8-15L | 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS | 24L II | 40mm pancake | 100L IS | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mk2 | 400mm f/4 DO IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben805
Goldmember
1,197 posts
Likes: 97
Joined Mar 2007
     
Jul 10, 2013 19:13 |  #28

The F stops here wrote in post #16106802 (external link)
Sold my first one in favor of the L but changed my mind as they are virtually identical optically (silly to research this after the fact i know, live and learn).


That's an overstatement. L has 9 circular blades, non-L has 8 blades, L has 15 elements in 12 group, non L has 12 elements in 8 groups, L also has 1 UD glass, non-L has none. You are blessed if you can't see the IQ difference, as lucky as those 85 1.8 owner who claimed it's optically as good as the 85L. :D


5D Mark III, Samyang 14mm, 35LII, 85L II, 100L IS Macro, 24-105L, 70-200L 2.8 IS II. 580EX, AB400, AB800.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CaliWalkabout
Senior Member
Avatar
337 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2010
Location: Oakland, CA, USA
     
Jul 10, 2013 20:20 |  #29

The L is a bit better, but the non-L is a fantastic lens. I've been happy with the upgrade but was also happy with the non-L for a long time. I like to be able to shoot off-the-cuff macro while I'm hiking or backpacking without dragging out the tripod. The IS doesn't solve every problem and doesn't replace a tripod or flash by any means, but it does provide a bit more flexibility.

I also liked the EF-S 60mm with my crop cameras, but sold it and kept the non-L as I preferred the reach of the 100mm even on a crop.


6D, 17-40L, 24L II, 50L, 100L, 70-300L.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ F ­ stops ­ here
Goldmember
Avatar
2,061 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2012
Location: San Jose, Ca
     
Jul 10, 2013 21:08 |  #30

ben805 wrote in post #16109192 (external link)
That's an overstatement. L has 9 circular blades, non-L has 8 blades, L has 15 elements in 12 group, non L has 12 elements in 8 groups, L also has 1 UD glass, non-L has none. You are blessed if you can't see the IQ difference, as lucky as those 85 1.8 owner who claimed it's optically as good as the 85L. :D

Convenient to only quote part of what i say to try and make your point ;). Never once did i or anyone else for that matter say the were the same quality wise, hence the term "virtually identical" meaning any "normal" person viewing the pics would not be able to tell the difference.

The side by side comparison posted above would look the same to anyone viewing. Posting lens specs does not instantly make the L superior, sure on paper it has lots of big numbers compared to the non L, but the reality boils down the the person behind the lens.

For me personally since macro is only a hobby i opted for the "cheaper" lens that way i could used the extra cash saved for other things i may want in the future. The OPs choice is the OPs choice, not trying to sway them one way or the other, just posting my experience and opinion which is what this forum is all about if i remember correctly :D


JD
Talent will get you far, but not as far as ambition
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/ (external link)
Smugmug-primefocus.smugmug.com (external link)

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

6,463 views & 0 likes for this thread
EF-100mm f/2.8 vs. f/2.8L IS
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?
Register to forums
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 336london
861 guests, 293 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.