Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

shot at evening f/16 with flash

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Jay T wrote in post #7893553
shot at evening f/16 with flash

Nice shot - good dof! I did one recently but made the mistake of using it wide open.

macobee wrote in post #7893330
Summer is here so Berries are here, lets add some Sugar for that extra Umph!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Those are really good! I like them!

macobee i love the light of those shots. Great job.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

I'm fairly new to the dSLR market myself having picked up a Canon 40D about 6 months ago. At the moment I just have the 17-85mm lens that came with the camera (and have been looking at the wonderful shots people have been taking with that lens in the relevant thread).

I'm now looking to get a macro lens and actually looked at this one in a shop here in Korea the other day. After getting a bit muddled with advice from different reviews on the Sigma 105mm, 150mm etc etc I think I'll be going for the Canon 100mm. The pictures you guys have taken with it are outstanding, and hopefully with a lot of practice I might be able to post something on here one day that's not too bad!

Beofre the 40D I had a G7, so it's been a bit of a steep learning curve. Not helped by the fact that I'm lazy when it comes to reading manuals and/or tips. Loved using the macro on the G7 though, which is why I'm looking at a lens like this. At the moment I pull out the G7 for close up shots, which seems a bit stupid.

If you want macro shots you need to start thinking about the depth of field. If you just point and shoot your 40D you may not get these results. The DOF is slim with the 100mm 2.8 when shooting macro and you may want to look at some of the EXIF data on the pictures to help give you a starting point if macro is going to be your game.

meh_meli wrote in post #7902951
If you want macro shots you need to start thinking about the depth of field. If you just point and shoot your 40D you may not get these results. The DOF is slim with the 100mm 2.8 when shooting macro and you may want to look at some of the EXIF data on the pictures to help give you a starting point if macro is going to be your game.

Thank you, I'll check out the data on the pictures to get some idea of what's required. I use the 40D in manual mode for the most part, but alternate between forgetting to turn on the camera and forgetting to take off the lens cap still! haha There's obviously still some way to go

Passionfruit Flower

Here's a shot taken at f/11 and a 100% crop:

Yesterday at the park where I walk my dogs.

I seem to be in a bit of a predicament. After looking through the majority of this thread Iv'e just just about fallen in love with this lens.
The problem that comes up though, is I was looking to get a new lens for my Hawaii trip in June. I was planning on going with the Canon 18-200mm for an general walking around lens. And after reading through this, some people have stated how the 100mm isn't the best to take on trips/carry around. And Im worried it wont do the greatest at night time. So I guess what im asking is, should I go ahead and purchase the 18-200 first, for the trip? Or do you think the 100mm will do fine.
BTW-the only other lens I will be bringing is the 18-55 kit lens.

Thanks for the help

I don't know how one could compare a 100mm prime to a 18-200mm zoom. The 100mm certainly wouldn't be considered a candidate for a walking around lens. However you have the added bonus of close-focusing plus macro for the wonderful Hawaiian flora.

I'm curious about how you came to the conclusion that "it won't do the greatest at night time." It is a wonderfully sharp 2.8 aperture lens while the the 18-200 is only 3.5-5.6, which is very slow on the long end.

It certainly isn't as versatile as the zoom but combined with your existing lens, you're only losing the 100 to 200mm length. So,If you don't think you'll need anything longer than 100mm it should be great, but your 18-55mm should be your walking around lens.

wables wrote in post #7921589
I seem to be in a bit of a predicament. After looking through the majority of this thread Iv'e just just about fallen in love with this lens.
The problem that comes up though, is I was looking to get a new lens for my Hawaii trip in June. I was planning on going with the Canon 18-200mm for an general walking around lens. And after reading through this, some people have stated how the 100mm isn't the best to take on trips/carry around. And Im worried it wont do the greatest at night time. So I guess what im asking is, should I go ahead and purchase the 18-200 first, for the trip? Or do you think the 100mm will do fine.
BTW-the only other lens I will be bringing is the 18-55 kit lens.

Thanks for the help

If you already own the 18-200, why bring the 18-55? Same 18-55 part, and same IS.

If you don't own it, I would get the 55-250 IS instead, to have a slightly bigger range in combination with the 18-55 IS. If you don't really need the long end of this range, I wouldn't hesitate about buying the 100 macro, it is plenty long on a crop, and I am pretty sure you will have ample opportunity to use it on Hawaii .

For night shots, I don't think either is all that great, and for the price difference between the 55-250 IS and the 18-200 IS, you could buy a 50 F/1.8 II, which will be much more useful for low light shots, if you ask me.

Kind regards, Wim

I'll second what Wim suggests, the lit lens with the 55-250 will give you a great range at a budget. You have broad vistas with the kit lens, and with the long lens you have a crack at surfers and birds. And, for another $100, you get low light with the 50 and it's very compact.

Of course, if you really want to devote time to tropical flowers the 100 is ideal for that, so a lot rests on what you are motivated to shoot. If you're a flower nut and surfers and birds interest you not a whit, then the macro could serve you better!

Myself, if I were to plan a trip to Hawaii, I'd want every lens in my arsenal, but that's just me!

I would just like to point out. that the kit lens zooms to 1:2.5. Which is almost macro range. It likely would be fine for general flower shots...