Macro Lens for 5D2

i use a Canon 100L on my 5D, it's excellent

Go with the Canon 100L, I don't have one but my I prefer Canon lenses.

What type of macro do you plan to do? Will IS/OS be a requirement?

K6AZ wrote in post #13876814
What type of macro do you plan to do? Will IS/OS be a requirement?

Mainly nature-related subjects like insects, flowers, plants, etc. I owned the Canon non-L 100mm macro a while back and I always wished it had IS (and a longer MFD)...

Kiwikat wrote in post #13876925
Mainly nature-related subjects like insects, flowers, plants, etc. I owned the Canon non-L 100mm macro a while back and I always wished it had IS (and a longer MFD)...

Hmmm... with FF you might want to wait on the Sigma 180mm OS. Otherwise I would go with the 150mm OS. 100mm is going to be a bit short for that on FF.

I have a 100mm f/2.8 non L macro. I love this lens to death, it is exceptional sharp when shooting non marco object, I used mine often for portraits as well.

I have tried them all (Canon macros) and I like the 180L. Working distance to subject is ideal, for me. Not a bad 180 prime either.
John

thestone11 wrote in post #13877150
I have a 100mm f/2.8 non L macro. I love this lens to death, it is exceptional sharp when shooting non marco object, I used mine often for portraits as well.

Here's a little secret - the 100mm USM is just as sharp as the 100L. I bought one because there was a special on them at the time and I had a 10% eBay coupon. I use the 100mm almost exclusively in the copystand so the IS is useless. If I find another clean 100mm USM I'll probably switch back.

john-in-japan wrote in post #13877158
I have tried them all (Canon macros) and I like the 180L. Working distance to subject is ideal, for me. Not a bad 180 prime either.
John

I love mine but IS would be helpful on it since it's the one I use outdoors. I expect Canon will eventually add IS to it and IS would be a heck of a lot more useful on a 180mm macro. I'm anxiously awaiting the reviews on the Sigma 180mm OS to see how that works out.

I used to have the original sigma 150 and it was a great lens for me I bought the 100l on a whim at a low price and its top shelf too. As I am getting better at macro I am wishing for the longer 150 again. Never tried a 180 but may rent one to see how that works. If I had to do it again I would jump on the sigma 150 OS

For those looking for the 180L keep an eye on the FS board. Some people buy them not fully understanding what they're getting into. I picked up a US date coded 180L that was virtually new with the box and everything for $900. I still see them frequently for under $1000.

Kiwikat wrote in post #13875869
All of you who are voting for the 100L, could you explain your choice? Is there a reason it is getting so many more votes?

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #13875897
lol it's probably because it is an L lens

Nail, hit on head.
As I mentioned in another poll recently, put up virtually any poll with an "L" versus any other option (save perhaps the standard zooms i.e. 17-40 vs 17-55), the L will win 99% of the time because of "L" snobs who just click on the thread, see one of the options has a shiny red "L", and automatically click it probably without even looking at the other choices.

The sigma is a better lens, no doubt about it, at least in terms of IQ, but having tried the L before, probably in terms of build as well. But as you say, it costs more, and is a different focal length. Focal length is the most important factor here. You say you didn't like the 100 on crop, you may not like the 150 on FF. But what didn't you like about the 100 on crop? Because 100 on FF is quite short for nature macro. Personally, I'd either get the 150 or the upcoming sigma 180 (though that is going to be a tad pricey seeing as its 2.8 and OS, which means I'd probably live with 30mm less and go for the 150. I know I'm not stealthy enough yet to get close to bugs with a 60mm on crop, which is the FOV you'll be getting with the 100 on FF).

This is no contest. If you're shooting insects you want the longer FL for its greater working distance. They're both exceptional lenses but for your purposes the Sigma is the better choice.

I own the 100L but voted for the 150 Siggie due to the nature of the work you want to do, 150 will give you a greater working distance.

I use my 100 2.8 L on both my 7D and 5D2 for both macro and portrait. The IQ on the 5D2 is out of this world for macro. It's better than the 7D by far. It's got a great MFD for bugs as you don't have to get too close, the IS is great for handheld (both portrait and macro) and when combined with a set of extension tubes the output is excellent.