New Canon 100mm f2.8L IS USM
- Thread starter Rubber_Duck
- Start date
My sentiments precisely. He managed to get it at $1284 'cos they ripped him off when he got the hood. They probably oversold the hood by $100 to make up the difference. Prices at CP and J316 are horrendous.
Luckily, there are alternatives (Parisilk, MSColor, TKPhoto, Orient, SLR etc).
An awesome price IF it includes GST.
Last edited:
Fyi, ms had the restock 5 copies yesterday. Got it at 1295. Those interested may call them to check.
I'm getting this lens after reading so much good reviews online... was comparing this with 135f2L and 85f1.8 if want to use this macro for portrait use... though AF a bit slow, but it seems that the IQ is tact sharp...
I was considering very very hard on whether to get this lens. After reading tons of reviews and carefully evaluating them, I can't find justification for the new L macro over the non-L.
Don't get me wrong, on its own, the L macro lives up to the L label. IQ is excellent and all that.
But then again, the non-L is already excellent in its IQ. Anything more, it's just viewing things in a microscopic way. In fact, if you read many (and I really mean many!!) online reviews, NO one has convincingly done a strong comparison and concluded Yes, the L macro is definitely better and worth the money. All give a very vague answer, like well, do you have $ to spend? Or they openly admit it's difficult to conclude that the L is worth the price diff.
The conclusions are that:
1. IQ wise, you'd be hard pressed to tell the diff between the L and non-L macro. If you can tell the diff very occasionally, then the L might have that slight edge, but only that VERY slight.
2. The HIS IS only works well for longer shooting distance (see point 3). So the price diff is really mainly on the extra IS feature that you get. Do you shoot in low shutter speeds or have unsteady hands? Then maybe the IS is justifiable for the many hundred $ price diff.
3. Canon claims the IS can work up to 2 stops for 1:1 magnification work. This is found to be an over-exaggeration by most users online. At best, they gain only 1 stop. Honestly, for macro work, 1 stop diff hardly helps. Even if it helps, you'd get more out of focus shots from the thin DOF than camera shake.
So for those who think you can do away with your tripod with this L macro, you'd be sorely disappointed. There's no magic here with the IS. But once you use a tripod, then this L macro is practically no different from the non-L!
I guess to conclude, this L macro will be useful if you shoot often non-macro eg portraits in low light or you shoot not-so-closeup macros (though I don't know how often you really do that given you've paid so much for a true macro lens). Then you have to decide if the few hundred $ price diff is really worth it.
Portrait wise, the L macro is still no match for the wider aperture Canon primes as far as bokeh is concerned.
But lenses being lenses, sometimes I suspect people buy the 100mm macro L cos it's simply an L (read: group pressure), instead of considering other (better?) options.
Juz my opinion... YMMV....
Don't get me wrong, on its own, the L macro lives up to the L label. IQ is excellent and all that.
But then again, the non-L is already excellent in its IQ. Anything more, it's just viewing things in a microscopic way. In fact, if you read many (and I really mean many!!) online reviews, NO one has convincingly done a strong comparison and concluded Yes, the L macro is definitely better and worth the money. All give a very vague answer, like well, do you have $ to spend? Or they openly admit it's difficult to conclude that the L is worth the price diff.
The conclusions are that:
1. IQ wise, you'd be hard pressed to tell the diff between the L and non-L macro. If you can tell the diff very occasionally, then the L might have that slight edge, but only that VERY slight.
2. The HIS IS only works well for longer shooting distance (see point 3). So the price diff is really mainly on the extra IS feature that you get. Do you shoot in low shutter speeds or have unsteady hands? Then maybe the IS is justifiable for the many hundred $ price diff.
3. Canon claims the IS can work up to 2 stops for 1:1 magnification work. This is found to be an over-exaggeration by most users online. At best, they gain only 1 stop. Honestly, for macro work, 1 stop diff hardly helps. Even if it helps, you'd get more out of focus shots from the thin DOF than camera shake.
So for those who think you can do away with your tripod with this L macro, you'd be sorely disappointed. There's no magic here with the IS. But once you use a tripod, then this L macro is practically no different from the non-L!
I guess to conclude, this L macro will be useful if you shoot often non-macro eg portraits in low light or you shoot not-so-closeup macros (though I don't know how often you really do that given you've paid so much for a true macro lens). Then you have to decide if the few hundred $ price diff is really worth it.
Portrait wise, the L macro is still no match for the wider aperture Canon primes as far as bokeh is concerned.
But lenses being lenses, sometimes I suspect people buy the 100mm macro L cos it's simply an L (read: group pressure), instead of considering other (better?) options.
Juz my opinion... YMMV....
Last edited:
nice insite you got there kiwi2.
since i have been using the non-L for almost 2 years, the only advantage of the L is of course IS & AF speed (yes, AF speed), not so much on the weather sealing (but its nice to have).
and besides, the premium of the L over the non-L (~$400) is just fine. coz the 70-200 f4 (+ ~$900 for the IS) & f2.8 (+ ~$1200 for the IS).
since i have been using the non-L for almost 2 years, the only advantage of the L is of course IS & AF speed (yes, AF speed), not so much on the weather sealing (but its nice to have).
and besides, the premium of the L over the non-L (~$400) is just fine. coz the 70-200 f4 (+ ~$900 for the IS) & f2.8 (+ ~$1200 for the IS).
Agree with your assessment. I 'upgraded' from non-L to L 'cos I need the HIS for non 1:1 macro shooting. Other than that, it may not be needed.
HIS at non 1:1 macro shooting works REALLY well. It's incredible actually. :bsmilie: For 1:1 macro shooting, HIS only gives 1 stop advantage. I usually shoot in manual mode for 1:1 macro so this 1 stop advantage translates into a brighter background which is nice.
while everyone is talking about the launch of 550D, the price drop of 5Dm2... let me share something else... I just bought a 100f2.8L today :thumbsup:
the build is not what you expected of the normal L lenses... it is made of hard plastic, but build is still better than non-L lenses... more solid feel i would say... but less attractive than the usual L lens
if use as a portrait lens, it does give nice bokeh... but prepared that the AF is slow
the box
the contents
here comes the lens
trial shot with the 100f2.8L with 5D2
shallow DOF... note that the colourful thingy at the back is just few cm away... they are files actually...
the build is not what you expected of the normal L lenses... it is made of hard plastic, but build is still better than non-L lenses... more solid feel i would say... but less attractive than the usual L lens
if use as a portrait lens, it does give nice bokeh... but prepared that the AF is slow
the box
the contents
here comes the lens
trial shot with the 100f2.8L with 5D2
shallow DOF... note that the colourful thingy at the back is just few cm away... they are files actually...
sorry to disagree but this lens is one of the fastest AF'ng lens there is. tried on both 5D2 & 40D, and it was lightning.:thumbsup:
I don't really care much for the AF but need the full time manual override for macro. The lens is superb sharp and the HIS is working pretty impressive
Here are some examples:
Here are some examples:
