ManWearPants
Senior Member
I am getting rid of my 24-70 and 70-200f2.8IS coz they are too heavy. So not going to add another heavy lens. My cutoff weight now is 800g for a single piece of lens
New Canon 100mm f2.8L IS USM
- Thread starter Rubber_Duck
- Start date
I am getting rid of my 24-70 and 70-200f2.8IS coz they are too heavy. So not going to add another heavy lens. My cutoff weight now is 800g for a single piece of lens
StrifeYun
Senior Member
I am getting rid of my 24-70 and 70-200f2.8IS coz they are too heavy. So not going to add another heavy lens. My cutoff weight now is 800g for a single piece of lens
waha hahah,, i magine canon "L" lens must have 1 more benefit which is ... LIGHT WEIGHT .... maybe nxt time all "L" lens will be Titanium ! haha
Nope, the new lens cannot be used with teleconverters see this --> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx
Sigma 24-70 only 700g :bsmilie:I am getting rid of my 24-70 and 70-200f2.8IS coz they are too heavy. So not going to add another heavy lens. My cutoff weight now is 800g for a single piece of lens
I also don't like 'L'ousy lenses. Most of them bulky and overpriced. :devil:
It's bulky due to very large apertures or constant apertures. Element size plays a part too.
I am getting rid of my 24-70 and 70-200f2.8IS coz they are too heavy. So not going to add another heavy lens. My cutoff weight now is 800g for a single piece of lens
Haha, then you still can get the 100L - it is only 625g - 25g more than the non-L non-IS version.
hetfieldpaul
New Member
I am getting rid of my 24-70 and 70-200f2.8IS coz they are too heavy. So not going to add another heavy lens. My cutoff weight now is 800g for a single piece of lens
Maybe you could consider the 28-300, all in one lens which weights less than 2 lenses combined
about 1.6kgMaybe you could consider the 28-300, all in one lens which weights less than 2 lenses combined
An excellent walkaround L lens for FF! But with a high price tag.
Rubber_Duck
New Member
I felt even you are into macro there is
no point having HIS, cos your lens will
mounted on tripod & HIS will be useless.
So I don't understand why canon have the
HIS in this lens why not other lens?:dunno:
Like 70-200mm or other heavy weight lens?:think:
no point having HIS, cos your lens will
mounted on tripod & HIS will be useless.
So I don't understand why canon have the
HIS in this lens why not other lens?:dunno:
Like 70-200mm or other heavy weight lens?:think:
vngks
New Member
yah, i still waiting for 70-200mkii upgrade with newer IS
millk milk milk
Will Canon be updating all the other lenses with the new hybrid IS? Anyone know for sure?
Let me put it another way - historically, did Canon update all their other lenses (with IS) whenever a new IS is invented?
1. The new HIS is designed with due consideration towards compensation for lateral/sideway shake/motion instead of angular deviation. This type of shake is more critical for macro work at short distances, and the conventional IS design cannot address this type of shake well. So, HIS is mainly for macro applications I guess. For normal non-macro work, HIS is not so critical, and the conventional IS should work fine. So there is no need to update the other lens with HIS.
2. The newer EFS 18-55 & EFS 55-250 is using 4th generation IS, while some L lens is still using 2nd or 3rd generation IS. So, the answer should be no, historically they don't update all the other lens with the latest IS technology.
2. The newer EFS 18-55 & EFS 55-250 is using 4th generation IS, while some L lens is still using 2nd or 3rd generation IS. So, the answer should be no, historically they don't update all the other lens with the latest IS technology.
engrmariano
Senior Member
actually, im already very happy with my non-L/IS macro.:thumbsup: but some times i envy my friends with 105 macro VR coz of (you know) VR!:thumbsd: and was anticipating that canon would upgrade it to IS version, definitely i'll upgrade to it even if it costs 50% more. but adding the redring makes the price twice the non-L/IS. now im more confused if its worth upgrading. 
honestly, the IS is the major reason for me to upgrade, the L is just for bragging rights!:sticktong
btw, its the only non-L on my lineup.
honestly, the IS is the major reason for me to upgrade, the L is just for bragging rights!:sticktong
btw, its the only non-L on my lineup.
engrmariano
Senior Member
CAN... use kenko TC's. im using it on my non-L/IS.:thumbsup:
Read somewhere that the VR is not effective for macro distances.. Have you actually tried the VR when shooting macro?
On the other hand, the HIS by canon is designed for macro applications as it is engineered to compensate for laterally shake at macro distances (that's what they say..).. so the VR is not comparable to HIS maybe..
On the other hand, the HIS by canon is designed for macro applications as it is engineered to compensate for laterally shake at macro distances (that's what they say..).. so the VR is not comparable to HIS maybe..
actually, im already very happy with my non-L/IS macro.:thumbsup: but some times i envy my friends with 105 macro VR coz of (you know) VR!:thumbsd: and was anticipating that canon would upgrade it to IS version, definitely i'll upgrade to it even if it costs 50% more. but adding the redring makes the price twice the non-L/IS. now im more confused if its worth upgrading.
honestly, the IS is the major reason for me to upgrade, the L is just for bragging rights!:sticktong
btw, its the only non-L on my lineup.
engrmariano
Senior Member
havnt tried the VR but it helps according to my friends.
well, lucky for us, HIS is better at least according to paper.
Similar threads
