EF 100f/2.8 Macro for Portraits??

Has anyone used the EF 100f/2.8Macro on a FF body for portraits? I have heard that it is incredibly sharp (like all macros), and I am looking for a longer portrait lens than my 50f/1.4 so I can put a little distance between myself and the subject. The 50mm is just a bit short for me on a FF when I am not taking full-body portraits, and trying for upper-body & head-shots. I was contemplating the 85f/1.8, but I have heard that for just slightly more, I can get the 100 macro and use it for portraits as well as macro work. Any sample portraits taken with this lens would be appreciated. ... I've already seen the thread on the 85f/1.8, and know that is a great portrait lens - I just want to see what the 100 macro can do before I make my decision. Since I already have the 50f/1.4, I already have a decent short FL portrait prime. ... I just need to add a longer FL to my bag. Thanks!!!

Have you checked out Pixel-peeper.com?

http://pixel-peeper.com …n=none&exp_max=​none&res=3

Wayne

I love it

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

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

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

Wow! Great examples! I have the lens. Now I need a FF! haha

I use mine for portraits as well, but on a crop body. I'll get some examples up.

Jarrad -- Wow. Pretty sharp. If I didn't know those were taken with a 100Macro, I would have guessed the 85f/1.8. Did you sharpen much??

I'd love to see more examples!!

I use this lens on my crop body and love it for portraits. Very sharp and a good background blur.

PictureDisk wrote in post #4567209
Jarrad -- Wow. Pretty sharp. If I didn't know those were taken with a 100Macro, I would have guessed the 85f/1.8. Did you sharpen much??

Thanks

The last image was sharpened a bit more than the others. The first two were only lightly selectively sharpened. I've had an 85 1.8. This Macro was noticeably sharper. It's an exceptionally sharp lens. No need to worry about that.

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

Both shot with the 100mm 2.8 Macro

Thnaks all - looks like it's the lens for me... just need a little money now....hopefully not too long..!

This is with FF and the 100mm at F2.8

PictureDisk wrote in post #4565419
Has anyone used the EF 100f/2.8Macro on a FF body for portraits? I have heard that it is incredibly sharp (like all macros), and I am looking for a longer portrait lens than my 50f/1.4 so I can put a little distance between myself and the subject. The 50mm is just a bit short for me on a FF when I am not taking full-body portraits, and trying for upper-body & head-shots. I was contemplating the 85f/1.8, but I have heard that for just slightly more, I can get the 100 macro and use it for portraits as well as macro work. Any sample portraits taken with this lens would be appreciated. ... I've already seen the thread on the 85f/1.8, and know that is a great portrait lens - I just want to see what the 100 macro can do before I make my decision. Since I already have the 50f/1.4, I already have a decent short FL portrait prime. ... I just need to add a longer FL to my bag. Thanks!!!

Yes it can do well at portrait, although a bit slower the slight increase in length helps with the control of depth of field. Bokeh is pleasant.

It is very sharp wide open however, this can be considered an issue with some portrait work where you might want to flatter the subject

A macro lens is very convenient for general work where the ability to get very close-in gives great flexibility. I would say that if your only application is portrait you are probably better to go for the 85/1.8.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #4577284
Yes it can do well at portrait, although a bit slower the slight increase in length helps with the control of depth of field. Bokeh is pleasant.

It is very sharp wide open however, this can be considered an issue with some portrait work where you might want to flatter the subject

A macro lens is very convenient for general work where the ability to get very close-in gives great flexibility. I would say that if your only application is portrait you are probably better to go for the 85/1.8.

I agree with Lester, the 100Mac can do portrait work quite well. He recommends the 85/1.8 if your only application is portraiture. ... I have both lenses, and can tell you that they can achieve similar results. The 100 can be a bit long on a 1.6 crop, but since you are interested in using it on a FF body, it would probably be fine. Since I shoot a crop, I use the 85 more often for portrait work. ... But my 100Mac is probably sharper, while still yielding a narrow DOF for a pleasant bokeh.

Thnaks. I do want macro possibility too, and as it's on a FF the length I think will be ok - I think I'll go for it!

Cheers

Not FF,(30D) but sure is sharp.2nd is crop of 1st. Shot wide open at f2.8.