MP-E65mm OR Canon EF 100mm f2.8L ?

Which one?

Both similarly priced. Thoughts anyone.

I am keen to try Macro (One day), I know the MP-E is manual focus and needs a tripod, focusing rack and 40 megawatt light and infinite patience, and no wind, and...

How do they compare?

I will read both specs in detail, but I'd like to hear from users who have one or both of these.

Thanks in Adv.
Rob.

100L = 1:1 magnification

MP-E65 = 5:1 magnification

100L macro gets my vote. I used to own it. when shooting maco, I honestly use manual focus anyway, but I don't always use a tripod. The IS on 100L is ridiculously good.

Another benefit is the 100L is wonderful at portraits. It doesn't have to be for macro. I've used it for portraits at f2.8... creates wonderful bokeh, good IS, sharp as hell.

The 100L macro is a nice all round lens and as said above, is great for portraits. The MP-E is a serious macro only lens. I have one sitting on my desk, but I never use it - partly because I am too lazy!

Shooting at greater than 1:1 is very difficult, and the 100 will be much easier to use in the magnification range it covers. I would never suggest to a novice that they start with an MPE 65. In addition, you can get well over 1.5:1 by simply adding extension tubes to a 1:1 lens. I have done more macro than anything else for 4 or 5 years, and I don't own and don't plan to buy an MPE 65.

Thanks for the thoughts so far. I might investigate rental to test, that might crystalize thoughts.

It is a long term project and I am not in a rush.

I have a Sigma 150 macro and have enough issues with the working range on that at 1:1. I have a lot of respect for guys who are able to work at 5:1 with a 65mm focal length - there's no way I could do it.

I have both (older version of the 100mm) and I'd recommend the 100mm for all the reasons others have said. It's quite difficult to use the MPE-65 at > 1:1.

I would start with the 100L first, the MPE-65 takes a lot of getting used to and you can easily find yourself getting discouraged by your results. The 100L will give you stunning macro results, not to mention its a darn good portrait lens too

They are two very different lenses. The 100mm macro is a normal 100mm lens that happens to be able to focus down to 1:1. It's great for large bugs like butterflies, dragon flies, mantis, and for flowers, basically anything longer than say an inch. It can also be used for portraits, kids, landscape, basically anything you ouwld use a 100mm lens for.

The MPE on the other hand is just for macro. THe longest it can get is going to be an object the size of your sensor or say for simplicity, about an inch long. Then it foes in from there to the very small.

Also, the MPE is not a manual focus lens, it is a no focus lens. The only way to focus is to move either the lens or the subject toward/away from each other. There is only one point that will be in focus at a fixed distance dependent on the magnification being requested.

Samples of a 100mm macro

Amazing.

No, it's the MPE65. If you want to get close, there is none better but close is all you can do.

As mentioned earlier, they are two very distinctly different lenses and they really are compliments of one another. The only overlap is that the 100mm can do 1:1 and the MPE starts at 1:1. For someone just starting the 100mm is probably the one to get first as you will eventually need them both if you want to get deeper into macro. But at least with the 100mm, you can do other things as well. It is not limited as the MPE is. Then, when your ready to kick it up a notch, spring for the MPE.

I have both lenses ( well, the non-L version of the 100mm anyway) and I would agree with the recommendations to go for the 100 first. The MP-E is a hardcore macro lens, very specialized and will do nothing else. The 100 is just a very good all round lens.