100m f/2.8L or no L?

[Fedgrub]

Hey all,

Considering getting the Canon Macro 100m f/2.8 lens. There's around $300 difference between the regular, and L series.

Anyone used either of these lenses, and do you think it's worth paying the extra for L? Thoughts?

Thanks!

[Tannin]

A lens with latest generation IS vs a lens with no IS at all? Not even a question. Go for the L every time. The extra quality of your shots will still be there in many years time, where the small extra cost will be forgotten in a month or two.

[Xenedis]

If you shoot macro subjects hand-held, then there's no question: go for the IS version.

The much older, non-IS, non-L version is a fantastically sharp and very capable lens, however.

[Fedgrub]

Good catch you two, totally missed that. Glad I ran it past here!!

DEfinately getting the L now.

[Tannin]

To be fair to the old non-L model, Fedgrub, it is universally regarded as a superb lens and no-one has ever quite worked out why it didn't get a red ring in the first place. Optically, the new model fails to improve on it more than incrementally - largely because there really wasn't a lot left to improve.

But as Xenedis says, for hand-holding macro subjects this IS is a godsend. Note that this is the first lens ever made with shift-mode image stabilisation as well as conventional angular mode, and for macro this is a major advance. Compare with the vast majority of old-school macro lenses with no IS at all, and with the newer batch (I think only from Nikkor so far) which have IS but switch it off at short focus distances because it doesn't work very well. Before too long, all macro lenses will have shift and angular IS; but only the 100/2.8L Macro has it now.

Oddly enough, however, I wasn't really thinking of the close-op abilities when I said "get the iS every time". I was thinking of the many non-macro uses for this lens. 100mm is a very nice length for all sorts of tasks, and IS means you can take good advantage of the spontaneity of hand-holding even in low light.

[Fedgrub]

Thanks, Tannin.

So when you say it switches off at short focus distance, is this automatic? Or just recommended?

Thanks!

[Tannin]

Neither, Fedgrub! That's the point. The 100 L macro is the first lens to incorporate Canon's new hybrid stabilisation system that works at macro distances as well as at longer range. It doesn't switch off at all. (Unless you yourself flick the switch to "off" for some reason.) Other lenses will follow, we assume. You'd guess that the 180/3.5 macro would be next, perhaps followed by a refreshed version of the delightful little EF-S 60mm macro. But with Canon ... who knows?

The lens that switches off is the Nikon 105mm macro (or "micro" in Nikon speak). It auto-detects close focus and switches off the VR whether you like it or not.

See here for more: http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx

All other macro lenses (well, all the others that I can think of) have no IS/VR at all - though I imagine that the sensor-based stabilisers on Pentax and Olympus cameras would be of at least some use, probably quite a bit.

[Fedgrub]

Ah, got it! Thanks!

Looking forward to getting it.

[dulvariprestige]

Is it advisable to use a tripod collar with the L version when mounting it on a tripod, or is it ok to just mount it by the camera body, because I see the collar is nearly $300 alone.

[Fedgrub]

Is it advisable to use a tripod collar with the L version when mounting it on a tripod, or is it ok to just mount it by the camera body, because I see the collar is nearly $300 alone.

I assumed the collar isn't required because it doesn't come with one. But that's just me... Hoping no collar is required anyway.

[Xenedis]

I assumed the collar isn't required because it doesn't come with one. But that's just me... Hoping no collar is required anyway.

The lens weighs 625g, and isn't long or front-heavy.

A collar isn't necessary.

[Fedgrub]

Thanks Xenedis.

For future reference, is there any set weights that a collar is required for? Or is it just a matter of logically considering length and weight?

[Xenedis]

For future reference, is there any set weights that a collar is required for? Or is it just a matter of logically considering length and weight?

I'm not sure if there's some formula.

Three of my lenses have tripod collars, and I use them when using those lenses on a 'pod.

I've used a heavier lens than the 100/2.8L IS Macro on a tripod, and it wasn't a problem. Of course, the stability of the tripod head is a key factor.

[Bennymiata]

There is another macro lens with IS (or OS in this case), and that's the new Sigma 150mm F2.8.

I bought one a couple of weeks ago, and it is the sharpest lens I've ever used.
The OS works well at macro distances too, and being 150mm, it means you can be a bit further away from the action and still get 1:1.
I also have the Canon 60mm Macro, and the sharpness and colours of the Sigma are a step above.

The Sigma is the first lens I've tried that I can zoom in to 200% size on the PC and the edges are still sharp!
None of my L lenses can do that.

If you're choosing between the Canon 100mm lenses, definitely go for the L if you can afford it.

[Tannin]

Fedgrub, I'd rather like to have the tripod collar because that would work better with the rest of my gear, but I;m damned if I'll pay that absurd price for it. I think you can get cheap knock-offs from Hong Kong or somewhere. I should look into that.

Note that you also need an adaptor ring if you have the twinlight flash.

[Bennymiata]

Here's a couple of shots I did, handheld, at night using the new Sigma 150mm Macro with OS and my 580EXII flash on the top of the camera.

The second shot is a 100% crop of the original.
Look carefully, and you'll see there are 2 bugs in the hole.

This berry is from a lilli-pilli and is less than 10mm in total diameter, so the bugs are around 1-2mm long.

75728


75729

[dulvariprestige]

That's pretty impressive Benny, the crop actually looks sharper than the original, around the same price as the L, but you get an extra 50mm, mmmmmmmm

[Fedgrub]

Nice shots Benny! Will definitely consider that lens after seeing those

[davearnold]

Thanks Benny, had talked myself out of that lens, but you have brought it back into consideration, and portrait "people" shots, to show how versatile it is?

[Bennymiata]

I don't do many portraits as most of my family and friends are camera shy but I think this Sigma lens would do a sterling job of them as the colours and contrast are excellent.
The bokeh is to die for! So creamy smooth.

Here's a shot I took with it of a nice flower bud, which is posted up in the flower section.
It is completely untouched as far as PP is concerned, and is just straight out of the camera and reduced in size for the forum.
The second shot is a 100% crop of the first shot, again, untouched by any PP othe rthan cropping.

One thing i really like about this lens, is that because you have a bit more distance between you and the subject, you can just use a normal flash with it, instead of having to spend lots of $$$ on a ring or macro flash.
Mind you, I do have a ring flash, whcih I use on my 60mm Macro, but for this lens, any flash mounted on the top of the camera will work well.

The lens is a bit bigger and heavier than the Canon 100 Macro (either of them), but it's not too big or heavy to use, even with a 580EXII on the top of it, and the lens comes with a tripod mount and lens hood as well.

75786

75785

[Tannin]

Interesting posts, BM. The Sigma 150 macro was the one I was all set to buy until the 100L IS came out and wrecked my plans!

As always, The Digital Picture review is instructive:

http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-150mm-f-2.8-EX-DG-HSM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx

Note that the Canon lens that Bryan compares the Sigma with is the old non-IS non-L 100mm macro, not the new one.

[Bennymiata]

That comparison is from the older Sigma macro without OS and the new splash proof coatings.

They complain that the old one is not so fast at focussing, but I find my new one very quick and almost as quick as my L lenses, especially in decent light.
The focussing is also very quiet.

[Art Vandelay]

Good info in here, thanks to all. - Even tough I didn't ask the questions.

Interesting info on the 150 Sigma too Benny, particularly the extra length & the use of a regular flash, something I hadn't considered.

[dulvariprestige]

I wish they'd have improved the focus speed on their new 70-200 OS, I actually think they went a little backwards, but the IQ has definitely improved.

[Tannin]

Interesting info on the 150 Sigma too Benny, particularly the extra length & the use of a regular flash

I quite often use a standard 580EX II with a macro lens, Art. I have a Canon Macro Twin-light but it doesn't fit on my 100mm Canon L macro because I haven't bought the adaptor ring for it yet. So there is one reason. A second reason is that I sometimes set up with a two or three different macro lenses on different bodies when I'm doing product photography (cause you want to take all your views of a particular item, then pack it away and move on to the next one). And a third is that if we are doing flora and Belinda has grabbed first dibs on the 60 macro & twin flash, then I get whatever is left over. :(

Obviously, it works just fine, especially for fill flash. For shots which are mostly flash (rather than just a bit of fill), the dual head flash is, of course, superior.

[Pine]

[QUOTE=Bennymiata;888093]I don't do many portraits as most of my family and friends are camera shy but I think this Sigma lens would do a sterling job of them as the colours and contrast are excellent.
The bokeh is to die for! So creamy smooth.

Here's a shot I took with it of a nice flower bud, which is posted up in the flower section.
It is completely untouched as far as PP is concerned, and is just straight out of the camera and reduced in size for the forum.
The second shot is a 100% crop of the first shot, again, untouched by any PP othe rthan cropping.

One thing i really like about this lens, is that because you have a bit more distance between you and the subject, you can just use a normal flash with it, instead of having to spend lots of $$$ on a ring or macro flash.
Mind you, I do have a ring flash, whcih I use on my 60mm Macro, but for this lens, any flash mounted on the top of the camera will work well.

The lens is a bit bigger and heavier than the Canon 100 Macro (either of them), but it's not too big or heavy to use, even with a 580EXII on the top of it, and the lens comes with a tripod mount and lens hood as well.

Hi Bennimiato
Without being critical these shots are no better than the Canon 100 mm

I prefer the Canon which is lighter than the Sigma and probably sharper :rolleyes:

Its all a matter of choice.
(See attached Lions)


Regards

[Pine]

Hi Fedgrub
Its all a matter of cost :D

If you can afford it buy the L but do you need it?

I looked at the cost difference between the the L and none L and took a chance
and have not been sorry.

The 100 mm is a great lens that is light and very sharp.

It use to be my favourite Kruger Park lens for photographing animals
until I replaced it with the 70-200L which has a longer reach and zoom.

Also used it for macro shots which is really a science of its own :rolleyes:
The wind moving the flowers whilst photographing them were more of a problem
than having IS or not.

I sometimes think that IS is simply another gadget that we do not need.

Neither my 20-70 or 100 has IS and they stay great lenses.

Your choice but I would get the none L. :cool:

Regards

[Fedgrub]

Thanks, Pine. Guess I will just put funds into the balance and see what happens. All this talk of flashes makes me think I should invest in a speedlite first though...

[Pine]

Hi Fedgrub
Thinking along the same lines just not sure what flash to get :rolleyes:

Regards

[Fedgrub]

Hi Fedgrub
Thinking along the same lines just not sure what flash to get :rolleyes:

Regards

I'm actually just about to start a flash unit thread! Keep an eye out

[Cage]

After market Tripod Rings. http://stores.ebay.com.au/Phoebe-G/Tripod-Mount-Ring-/_i.html?_fsub=21140477&_sid=149383390&_trksid=p4634.c0.m322

I've used this seller several times and the gear has always been quite good.

[Pine]

I'm actually just about to start a flash unit thread! Keep an eye out

Will do :p

Thanks

[Bennymiata]

Tripod rings are good, but if you have a grip on your camera, they are useless as the legs on them are too short (in most cases) and the whole lot won't mount on the tripod (in my case using a Manfrotto head) because the grip gets in the way.
If using the grip, I always have to mount the camera on the tripod instead of using the ring putting undue strain on the lens mount.

What do you guys with 1D's do regarding using tripod rings?

[flyfisher]

G'Day Fedgrub, I have the 100mm f2.8L IS version and like you will not pay the ridiculous price tag for the Canon collar so I bought the HK version for around $15 and have never had any issues. Strangely enough I have never used the IS when doing macro work as most shots are used with a tripod (this is where the collar comes in handy to rotate the body from portrait to landscape). The 100mmm is such a handy length that I use it as a portrait lens as well (that is where the IS comes into it's own. I have attached a fungi shot with the 100mm, no flash, shot in a rainforest using an A4 sheet of paper as a reflector (my itinerary) - these are are only about 1cm wide on a small stick - mounted on a tripod using the collar an IS off.

[Fedgrub]

Thanks, Flyfisher. Really nice shot, too!

[Tannin]

What do you guys with 1D's do regarding using tripod rings?

It's not an issue. The clearance on the 100-400 is only just enough, but there is heaps on the bigger lenses. All of this is with a Wimberley head though (standard Arca-Swiss mount), it might be different with the Manfrotto ones.

Hmmm .... Now that you remind me of it, I used to use my 100-400 on my old Manfrotto head back before I got the Wimberley. It was fine. I'd remember if there had been problems.

[William W]

I have used both and I own the earlier non IS model. Both are very crisp lenses.

The L version is sharper and this can be noticed to by reasonable eye, at the edges, at F/2.8.

The value (or not) of the hybrid IS really depends upon what you will shoot and in what circumstances: as a general comment, if you are hand held often then the IS will be of value.

The value (or not) of the tripod collar is not limited to judging the weight, or the balance of the lens and in any case, the balance of the lens has a lot to do with what camera is on its bum. The Tripod collar is very useful, for example, to move form Portrait to Landscape Orientation without moving the camera viewpoint.

I do not see the value for me, to sell my non-IS version and to buy the new IS version, however if I were buying a 100mm macro lens now, I would buy the new L IS version as the IS cannot be a bad thing to have around, and a little bit extra sharp is a bonus.

In that $300.00 “extra” you should also reckon the Lens Hood, which I assume is included in the L version, but is not in the other.

I would buy the Tripod Collar, also, mainly for the example reason I outlined, above.


WW

[hdn177]

Great thread, I was about to ask the same question :D

Have you decided which lens to go?

[Fedgrub]

Definitely going to go with the L, but thinking of the 24-70 f/2.8L or 24-105mm f/4L first.

[Tannin]

^ So I take it you're not married yet, Fedgrub.

(But you have been engaged. Thirty-four times, as a matter of detail.)

:)

[Fedgrub]

^ So I take it you're not married yet, Fedgrub.

(But you have been engaged. Thirty-four times, as a matter of detail.)

:)

haha, no I'm not married. Probably why I'm trying to collect good equipment sooner rather than later... ha

[andylo]

What do you guys with 1D's do regarding using tripod rings?

1DIII and 70-200L IS II owner here - I have the tripod mount set to "portrait" position before I mount the lens to the camera. After then you can free turn 360* without problem.

[andylo]

Definitely going to go with the L, but thinking of the 24-70 f/2.8L or 24-105mm f/4L first.

I have 100L and 24-70L, can lend you have a play in the next AP meet.

But if you already have a decent standard zoom, don't see the point to get a 24-70L over 100L

[Fedgrub]

I have 100L and 24-70L, can lend you have a play in the next AP meet.

But if you already have a decent standard zoom, don't see the point to get a 24-70L over 100L

Thanks Andy. I just got the 24-105mm F4L so I will be looking at the 100L next.