Short Bokeh test 100mm macro 50L, 85L, 135L minimum focusing distance

I just wanted to see how good the bokeh was at macro distances with the 100mm macro, and then just decided to shoot the other ones at their MFD.

85L vs 135L

50L and an overview of the setup, I hope this is useful.

I like these sort of comparisons, thank you for taking these!

The MFD on the 85L is one of the primary reasons I don't like shooting with it. If it had a closer MFD, it'd be a phenomenal walk around lens for me... hence, why the 50L is my boo.

135L looks pretty. So does the 50L.

MatthewK wrote in post #18189830
I like these sort of comparisons, thank you for taking these!

The MFD on the 85L is one of the primary reasons I don't like shooting with it. If it had a closer MFD, it'd be a phenomenal walk around lens for me... hence, why the 50L is my boo.

135L looks pretty. So does the 50L.

Pop in a extension tube.

Uhm... the macro in the second shot is tagged as f/2.8, yet it shows a polygonal bokeh

MatthewK wrote in post #18189830
I like these sort of comparisons, thank you for taking these!

The MFD on the 85L is one of the primary reasons I don't like shooting with it. If it had a closer MFD, it'd be a phenomenal walk around lens for me... hence, why the 50L is my boo.

135L looks pretty. So does the 50L.

your MFD comments is spot on - you may find the Tamron 85 1.8 works for you - MFD is 2 1/2 ft vs 3ft for the 85L II - that is basically enough that it is never an issue and also co-incidentally, basically equates the DoF at F1.8 at 2 1/2 feet as being equal to the DoF at F1.2 at 3 feet - plus mounting the lens with the rear element not being flush reduces the stress level immensely (and you get weather sealing for street shooting)

Goodness, the colour out of 135L is gorgeous. 50 has such a unique look, both of them left me salivating. Thanks for sharing these.

CheshireCat wrote in post #18189849
Uhm... the macro in the second shot is tagged as f/2.8, yet it shows a polygonal bokeh

Actually once you get to macro distances, even when set to f2.8 , the aperture closes down by itself, the first time I noticed that, I thought my lens was broken.

Also the macro shots display some sort of an extra shadow surrounding the object, any ideas why?

The 85L and 135L have a very similar MFD, but the extra 50mm makes a big difference. I do find often that I want to get slightly closer with the 85L, especially because I just got it, and the 50 and 135, let you frame tighter. But for indoor portraits, you can't beat the 85L. Well, unless I want to show more of the environment, then I use the 50mm.

The 100L gets some 'love' as a portrait lens. Yes, it is sharp, but the bokeh is not great, even at 'normal' distances.

I haven't see that shadowing, but I'm usually stopped down at macro distances to get some DOF. Still as I said, bokeh of the 100L is not it's strong point IMO, so it could be that backlight effect combined with the OOF edge.

Moncho wrote in post #18190368
Also the macro shots display some sort of an extra shadow surrounding the object, any ideas why?

It seems to me longitudinal chromatic aberration, very visible due the strong background light creating contrasty silhouette edges.
It is the same phenomenon many call "fringing", visible on tree branches on a bright sky.
This is due to the fact that some light frequencies are not focused on the same plane, and therefore project a different size image on the sensor.

ejenner wrote in post #18190394
The 100L gets some 'love' as a portrait lens. Yes, it is sharp, but the bokeh is not great, even at 'normal' distances.

I haven't see that shadowing, but I'm usually stopped down at macro distances to get some DOF. Still as I said, bokeh of the 100L is not it's strong point IMO, so it could be that backlight effect combined with the OOF edge.

In this case it is the 100mm non L. And I absolutely agree with you, it was my portrait lens, and I was about to upgrade it to the 100L for the weather sealing and IS, but saw a comparison of the bokeh between the 100L vs 135L, and I fell in love with the 135L. Now it just does macro stuff. But for headshots, where f2.8 or f4 is fast enough the 100 macros shine!

if you want a rugged type head shot for men, you really can't beat the 100L - sharper is better

Thanks for the time but proper framing is key otherwise the telephoto always wins. I bet if you framed that 85 equal to the 135 the 85l would be the strong winner