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 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

 
Owl_79
Senior Member
Avatar
786 posts
Likes: 99
Joined Feb 2010
     
Dec 02, 2015 16:10 |  #16

EF 100 2.0 USM does 1x or 1:1 magnification, with Raynox DCR-250 macro conversion lens.


Canon
http://tonskulus.kuvat​.fi/kuvat/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,025 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2201
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 02, 2015 16:16 |  #17

they're two different tools...is there something they can both do, yes...but each can do something the other lens can't...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,233 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 265
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
Post edited over 3 years ago by msowsun.
     
Dec 02, 2015 16:30 |  #18

I have both the 100mm 2.8 USM Marco and 100mm 2.0 USM. They are both great lenses and cheap enough that I can't see myself selling either one.


Mike Sowsun / S110 / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 18-135mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
n1as
Goldmember
2,327 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Dec 06, 2015 10:41 |  #19

I'm still waiting for some facts about the 100/2 USM being better for general portrait work than the 100 macro. Sure, we have f/2 vs f/2.8 but if you're stopping down to f/2.8 or more then you're throwing away that benefit. What other benefits does the 100 USM have over the Macro lens?


- Keith
http://darwinphoto.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,025 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2201
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 06, 2015 10:52 |  #20

n1as wrote in post #17809216 (external link)
I'm still waiting for some facts about the 100/2 USM being better for general portrait work than the 100 macro. Sure, we have f/2 vs f/2.8 but if you're stopping down to f/2.8 or more then you're throwing away that benefit. What other benefits does the 100 USM have over the Macro lens?

Well if youre shooting at a distance with fast shutter speed what benefits does the macro have over the 100f2? Pointing out where they overlap isnt going to show benefits for either


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
Dec 06, 2015 12:17 |  #21

n1as wrote in post #17809216 (external link)
I'm still waiting for some facts about the 100/2 USM being better for general portrait work than the 100 macro. Sure, we have f/2 vs f/2.8 but if you're stopping down to f/2.8 or more then you're throwing away that benefit. What other benefits does the 100 USM have over the Macro lens?

Well I can tell you this. I don't have the 100/2, but I do have the 85/1.8 and I imagine the focusing performance would be nearly identical between the two.

I use the following lenses for portraits: 50/1.4, 60/2.8, 85/1.8, 100L, and 135/2. I can tell you that both of the macro lenses have a higher probability of hunting focus where as the regular primes do not. The problem is much less worse with the 100L because I can use the focus limiter switch. The regular primes all let in 2 to 4 times as much light for focusing even if the shot is stopped down to the same aperture.

I suspect that if I had proper studio lights with modeling lights instead using the speed light set up I am using, that problem would go away though because I never have hunting problems in good light outdoors with good light with the macro lenses.


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
Gungnir
Senior Member
Avatar
692 posts
Gallery: 37 photos
Likes: 252
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Suffolk, England
     
Dec 06, 2015 13:34 as a reply to  @ n1as's post |  #22

The 100 F/2 bokeh is much more pleasing for portraits (not just at F/2).

The lens just gives a nicer feel to a portrait image. It's difficult to quantify.


Steve
'Be the person your dog thinks you are'
#freetommy

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
Avatar
2,844 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Likes: 217
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Kawasaki, Japan
Post edited over 3 years ago by InfiniteDivide. (2 edits in all)
     
Dec 07, 2015 01:07 |  #23

Here is a "non-typical portrait" with the 100L It is not cropped.

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5678/23066125242_0397600675_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/B9gV​qw  (external link) A Wise Fox (external link) by James Patrus (external link), on Flickr

I don't find the OOF bokeh to be displeasing. The nose, however, is OOF due to the thin dof at f2.8.
I could have used a slower shutter speed, but these foxes moved sporadically, I was happy to nail focus on the eyes.


OP: You need to focus explicitly on these two lenses differences, their strengths.
Do you need a lens with IS because you will primarily be shooting subjects handheld? (That's me)
Do you want a 100mm focal lens lens that can shot at f2.0?

If your still unsure, check out the sample gallery thread for many more examples from both lenses.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=760368

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=226590

James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddieb1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
843 posts
Likes: 165
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Oregon
     
Dec 07, 2015 21:47 |  #24

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #17809996 (external link)
Here is a "non-typical portrait" with the 100L It is not cropped.

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/B9gV​qw  (external link) A Wise Fox (external link) by James Patrus (external link), on Flickr

I don't find the OOF bokeh to be displeasing. The nose, however, is OOF due to the thin dof at f2.8.
I could have used a slower shutter speed, but these foxes moved sporadically, I was happy to nail focus on the eyes.


OP: You need to focus explicitly on these two lenses differences, their strengths.
Do you need a lens with IS because you will primarily be shooting subjects handheld? (That's me)
Do you want a 100mm focal lens lens that can shot at f2.0?


If your still unsure, check out the sample gallery thread for many more examples from both lenses.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=760368

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=226590

I was most interested in the 100L that my friend and I have. Like I said, he has both, and I was wondering why have both. I understand the need by some to have both, but I need IS. Getting older and not as steady as I used to be. I'm sure no one else has that issue:lol:.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,746 posts
Gallery: 73 photos
Likes: 698
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
Post edited over 3 years ago by ejenner.
     
Dec 07, 2015 23:28 |  #25

Gungnir wrote in post #17809382 (external link)
The 100 F/2 bokeh is much more pleasing for portraits (not just at F/2).

The lens just gives a nicer feel to a portrait image. It's difficult to quantify.

I haven't used the 100/2, but can easily believe the bokeh is nicer. Sure the above shot the 100L looks OK, but I have shots where my 24-105 bokeh looks OK and even where my 70-200 f4 IS looks nice. In general, however, I don't think the 100L bokeh is that great. If it poor enough to warrant buying a 100/2 just for portraits? Dunno, 100L bokeh is definitely not bad. I'd save a bit more and get a used 135L. Although I can see why someone might have both a 100L and 100 f2, it can't be all that common.

Also as much as I like the 100L, even with the focus limiter, while the AF seems snappy, it is actually not all that fast. I tried using it for basketball for once instead of my 135L and my keeper rate was much, much lower because of the AF.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

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

4,024 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?
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 Charis
816 guests, 258 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.