Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 27 Apr 2010 (Tuesday) 16:11
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Besides macro what good is a 100 2.8?

 
Tanglefoot47
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Apr 27, 2010 16:11 |  #1

I am looking for a 85 1.8 mainly for sports when I am close to the action. But I am wondering how well a 100 2.8 macro would do for this? I would like to get a macro and be able to use it for other things

I know the 85 1.8 would be better for indoor sports but with the high ISO abilities of the 7D I found I can get good results with a 2.8 lens

Mike




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
itzcryptic
Goldmember
1,174 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Cincinnati
     
Apr 27, 2010 16:14 |  #2

Most macros do not focus very fast, so they don't make a good match for sports.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CosmoKid
Goldmember
Avatar
4,235 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2009
Location: NJ
     
Apr 27, 2010 16:26 |  #3

why not go the other way around? 85 1.8 + tubes.


Joe- 2 bodies, L 2.8 zoom trilogy and a couple of primes
iRocktheShot.com (external link) - Portfolio (external link)

Gear/Feedback
Facebook "Fan" Page (external link) -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ImRaptor
Goldmember
Avatar
1,448 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Humboldt, SK Canada
     
Apr 27, 2010 16:28 |  #4

The two Macros I've used, Canon 100mm and Sigma f2.8, both had reasonably quick AF provided you remember to use the AF limiter switches. Leaving those suckers on full range ends up with considerably slower AF.
Now my Sigma 150mm is no match for the 85mm f1.8 in AF, but it's very near as good as my 70-200mm f4.0 L was. Again, it had to be with the limiter switch used. Leaving it on full range puts these things in contention with the AF speed of a 50mm f1.8.


http://imraptor.devian​tart.com/ (external link)
Why yes, I am a jerk. Thank you for asking.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Apr 27, 2010 16:32 |  #5

itzcryptic wrote in post #10077500 (external link)
Most macros do not focus very fast, so they don't make a good match for sports.

That's what I am worried about




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tanglefoot47
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,413 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Tulalip WA about 40 miles north of Seattle
     
Apr 27, 2010 16:33 |  #6

CosmoKid wrote in post #10077576 (external link)
why not go the other way around? 85 1.8 + tubes.

I have been kicking around the idea of tubes on my 200 so this might be a very good idea. Use a 85 1.8 with tubes and then have my fast lens for close up sports




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
itzcryptic
Goldmember
1,174 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Cincinnati
     
Apr 27, 2010 19:04 |  #7

ImRaptor wrote in post #10077593 (external link)
The two Macros I've used, Canon 100mm and Sigma f2.8, both had reasonably quick AF provided you remember to use the AF limiter switches. Leaving those suckers on full range ends up with considerably slower AF.
Now my Sigma 150mm is no match for the 85mm f1.8 in AF, but it's very near as good as my 70-200mm f4.0 L was. Again, it had to be with the limiter switch used. Leaving it on full range puts these things in contention with the AF speed of a 50mm f1.8.

That may help with hunting, but my 60mm f/2.8 (which doesn't have a limiter switch) is still not "snappy" to focus with even when it doesn't hunt.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
popawalker
Member
30 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Channelview, Texas
     
Apr 27, 2010 19:18 |  #8

I have both the 85 1.8 and the 100 macro 2.8, on my 20D and 5D there's no comparison, the 85 is faster, I don't think my 100 would work for sports. On my 1V the 100 focuses relatively fast.
Steve




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ImRaptor
Goldmember
Avatar
1,448 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Humboldt, SK Canada
     
Apr 27, 2010 19:34 |  #9

itzcryptic wrote in post #10078444 (external link)
That may help with hunting, but my 60mm f/2.8 (which doesn't have a limiter switch) is still not "snappy" to focus with even when it doesn't hunt.

The 60mm ef-s, which I have also used, is not in the same AF league in my opinion as the 100mm and 150mm, but more into the realm of the 180mm Macros in terms of speed. On top of the increased speed, the reduction in hunting is also a huge factor with macro lenses; thus the limiter switches.
The 60mm is a decent Macro lens, but it does have it short comings from being the cheapest 1:1 macro lens that Canon sells.


http://imraptor.devian​tart.com/ (external link)
Why yes, I am a jerk. Thank you for asking.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
itzcryptic
Goldmember
1,174 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Cincinnati
     
Apr 27, 2010 20:02 |  #10

ImRaptor wrote in post #10078589 (external link)
The 60mm ef-s, which I have also used, is not in the same AF league in my opinion as the 100mm and 150mm, but more into the realm of the 180mm Macros in terms of speed. On top of the increased speed, the reduction in hunting is also a huge factor with macro lenses; thus the limiter switches.
The 60mm is a decent Macro lens, but it does have it short comings from being the cheapest 1:1 macro lens that Canon sells.

I guess I skimmed over your post too quickly, you obviously have more experience with the macros than I do. I thought you were saying focus speed was on par with the 50mm f/1.8 (but that was with the limiter off).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Overkill-F1
Senior Member
Avatar
479 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2007
Location: BC, Canada
     
Apr 28, 2010 00:06 |  #11

The 85 f1.8 was going to be my next Canon lens. After quite a bit of research, I believe I'll be getting the 100mm f2. It is the sister lens to the 85 f1.8. It has all the good qualities of the 85 (size, fast focus, IQ) and a little less CA/purple fringing. The 100mm length works well for me and my crop camera.
...Terry


50D, 450D, 18-55mm IS, 30mm f/1.4, 60mm f2.8 macro, 100mm f2,
For Sale- EF 24mm f/2.8
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness". Dave Barry

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
harcosparky
Goldmember
2,415 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 49
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Harford County - ( Bel Air ) Maryland
     
Apr 28, 2010 05:20 |  #12

My Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro focuses fast enough, provided the user puts the focus limit switch in the proper position.

On the lens there are three settings for the focus limiter, if you are trying to focus outside the setting you are on it's slow and may not focus at all. You cannot go from shooting a gnat on a flies backside to shooting a horse coming down the homestretch without resetting that switch.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
magwai
Goldmember
1,094 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Guildford, UK
     
Apr 28, 2010 05:33 |  #13

don't you need a zoom for sports?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
itzcryptic
Goldmember
1,174 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Cincinnati
     
Apr 28, 2010 08:32 |  #14

Depends. For indoor sports, you sometimes need a fast lens (faster than 2.8). If you need a different focal length you can buy a 2nd camera and switch cameras instead of zooming.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Apr 28, 2010 11:12 |  #15

magwai wrote in post #10080892 (external link)
don't you need a zoom for sports?

Nope....And for most indoor sports, any zoom would be too slow. The Canon 85mm f/1.8 is a great basketball lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,793 views & 0 likes for this thread
Besides macro what good is a 100 2.8?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is erichphoto
999 guests, 365 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.