Help Me Understand ..

I recently got a 100 2.8L MACRO. Its my first and only prime and I am really enjoying it.

I shoot mostly zooms (convenient kit lenses & 70-200 2.8) with my 60D, 7D, and 5Dc so its always a little adjustment when I'm out with the 100L; wide compositions being a tad tricky with the fixed length.

I like taking the 7D+100L out on my walk-abouts (MA set to 0) and what I have found is that shots from the 100L never need any help. They're SHARP (to a fault) and all I ever find myself doing is WB adjustments and maybe tweaking the lighting a bit. Its light, the bokeh is super delicious and AI servo is FAST. Sometimes it takes a bit to focus from infinity to close range (or vice versa) but I think that's one of the 100L's weaknesses, isn't it?

So my questions are:

1. Is my 100L super sharp because its a prime?
   
2. Can I extrapolate the previous question to say "Are all primes sharp/sharper than zooms?"
   
3. Is it sharp because I just lucked out and got a good copy?
   
4. Are 1:1 lenses inherently sharp/sharper than other primes?
   

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/kykhans/6140532​796/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/kykhans/6140088​071/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/kykhans/6140634​224/

If you really enjoy the 1:1 macro shooting as it sounds, the 100L/f2.8 IS USM is indeed a fine sharp prime lens. Not knowing your max budget but reading your initial post capture needs i would sell the entire below:

18-135Kit, 28-135Kit, 55-250, 70-200 F2.8L IS, & 70-200 F2.8 L

And consider the below to go along with your 3 current camera bodies:

Tamron 28-75/f2.8
Sigma 30/f1.4
Canon 70-200/f2.8 MKII IS USM
Canon 100L/ f2.8 IS USM Macro

IMHO the Tamron is a very sharp all purpose lens producing photos equal to the 24-70 for a fraction of the cost.

The Canon 70-200 MKII is essentially a zoom combo of sharp primes.

The Sigma 30/f1.4 prime is ideal for your low-light captures with your crop bodys.

You didnt mention the need for any wide angle objectives but if you desire quality IQ the 3 lenses i suggested will achieve your goals. But thats just me !

Regards & Good Luck,

Wow, the 70-200 II is that good?

I forgot to mention it, but yes, I'd like to have a wide lens for landscapes. I used to think about getting a 24-105 F4L for vacation use, but I rented one (to shoot a party indoors) and wasn't too thrilled with the results. Maybe it was just a bad copy, but 24-105 is a very nice range if I could get a sharp unit.

I will look into the Tamron 28-75; it shouldn't be that big a deal losing 4mm at the wide end (as opposed to a 24-70). Thanks for the input

In general, I think it's safe to assume that in a given class of lenses, a prime will be sharper than a zoom when shot wide open. And when stopped down to the same aperture, primes will also on the balance be sharper, at least to a certain point.

That said, I wouldn't feel locked into going either with primes or zooms. Both types of lenses have their uses and relative strengths and weaknesses. And unless you are shooting wide open most of the time or want extremely large prints, the sharpness difference is probably going to be negligible.

Is my 100L super sharp because its a prime?

Yes, but also because it's a very well designed prime


Can I extrapolate the previous question to say "Are all primes sharp/sharper than zooms?"

Pretty much yes, primes are generally considered sharper than zooms, especially at the same aperture. This is mainly because they need to have less elements and can be callibrated in advance to just 1 fl

Is it sharp because I just lucked out and got a good copy?

The 100L is one of the sharpest lenses MTF-wise out there. Within the 100L range, you may or may not have gotten a special copy, but I doubt it, I think you'd be thrilled with 99% of the 100L's out there

Are 1:1 lenses inherently sharp/sharper than other primes?

Macro lenses are special, but I don't think they're inherently sharper, like by design or something, no.

1.Is my 100L super sharp because its a prime?
- The macro being a prime definitely helps in its sharpness.


2.Can I extrapolate the previous question to say "Are all primes sharp/sharper than zooms?"
- In general, I think this is a true statement. But beyond that, they are also faster.


3.Is it sharp because I just lucked out and got a good copy?
- The 100mm L is generally a very sharp lens.


4.Are 1:1 lenses inherently sharp/sharper than other primes?
- Not neccesarily.


I owned both the 24-70mm and the 24-105mm. The 24-70mm is a tad sharper than the 24-105mm. In my travel kit, I take the 24-105mm for weight reduction and the extra reach. The 24-105mm does extremely well when there is enough of light. But at night and indoors, it falls short since the shutter speed goes down so much. That's when I bring out my 50mm 1.2L. If you have a crop sensor body, then the 50mm maybe a bit long for indoors.

The 70-200mm 2.8IS II is a spectacular lens. I don't own one (still have the mark I) but from all the photos I've seen from this lens, it is very very sharp. However, I think my 85mm 1.2, 100mm 2.8L macro, and 135mm 2.0L still has an edge over the 70-200mm 2.8IS II.

Are you judging your 100mm IS lens handheld to your non IS lenses handheld? Image stabilization make a big difference handheld as to non IS lenses handheld. Try a tripod test of your lenses to see if there is still a big difference between the lenses.

The 100L is one of Canon's very sharpest lenses and it outresolves all current sensors (meaning when you get a new 30MP body, it'll seem even sharper).

@calicajun, the samples I put up were all handheld but I am not comparing handheld/tripod shots .. the 100L is just spectacular no matter how I use it and whatever I shoot with it All my other lenses are IS except for the non-IS 70-200 which lives in its box ready for sale; so IS is not the issue here.

@madweasel .. that sounds awesome; can't wait

One other thing about (good) macro primes is that they have a flat field of focus. This makes them well-suited to photographing documents and can make a difference with other subjects too.