Canon Macro Lens

[drk75]

Hi every body,
This is my first post so please be gentle (hehe)
Been using a Canon 50mm Macro on a 1000D ( Enjoy the details of flowers and maybe some bugs) now i want to upgrade to the 100mm, beside price is there much of a differnece between the IS L and the standard 100mm lens most of my shots are hand held, so Im sorta leaning towards the IS. Also I keep looking at the Sigma 150mm Macro, there is a new 150mm on Sigmas site but no price. What are your thoughts on the 3.

Thanks for your time, and apologies if this question has been asked before.

[in2fx]

I have never used the L version, but I am VERY happy with the speed of focus if used on AF and the sharpness of the standard 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

[Captured frame]

Have just bought the Canon standard 100mm f2.8 USM Macro and I am also very impressed with it`s speed of focus and sharpness, also is very good for portraits as well.

[pgbphotographytas]

I also have this lens and am very pleased with it.

Paul

[agb]

I hope we are allowed to post links.
Nardes on this page has a ripper of a shot with the 100mm f2.8 macro.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...799284&page=25

[soulman]

I have the new one, which is undoubtedly one of Canon's sharpest lenses, though I understand that the older model is not far behind it. Something to remember with the IS on the new one is that it does not correct for backward & forward movement, which is a very easy way to get way out of focus when shooting macro. I don't know anything about the Sigma, but could imagine it being inconveniently long on a crop body. The non L Canon seems like it is probably the best value for money to me, but the new one is wonderful if you can afford the best.

[Arg]

If you can afford either, I cannot imagine a reason not to buy the IS 'L'. I love mine. The IS gives it more flexibility as a lens shooting hand held portraits and even as a low light lens.

[drk75]

Thanks for your help guys, looks like the IS L version.
Those photos are amazing.

Thanks again.

[Tricky]

Another option to consider... get the 100mm non-L lens and use the money saved to pair it up with an MT-14 or MT-24 macro flash. Personally I found that the move to a macro flash was a much bigger step forward than my move from a 60mm macro to 100mm L IS macro.

That said, the 100 L IS is a superb lens... so wouldn't blame you for buying one!

[rwg717]

If you can afford either, I cannot imagine a reason not to buy the IS 'L'. I love mine. The IS gives it more flexibility as a lens shooting hand held portraits and even as a low light lens.

Yes, I'm of the same opinion, if your interested the EF 100 f2.8L also makes an absolutely brilliant portrait lens, and yes the IS is awful handy
Richard