Review - Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro

[neuroanatomist]

I'm with brad-man, "soft" would be the absolute last word I use to describe the 100 f/2.8 L ... bitingly sharp is more like it.  you should definitely get that checked out by Canon.

+1 - it's wickedly sharp. 

[EchoLocation]

While I appreciate the reviews, it seems like this is an absolute no brainer.
Everyone knows this lens is awesome... It's basically a fact at this point.
It's like having an article about how Scarlett Johansson is hot, or if Thailand has nice beaches.....
The most interesting thing I learned from this review is that the 100L was Neuro's first L lens! WOW, I guess APS-C cameras are the gateway drug of the camera world as you are apparently fully addicted to the hard stuff(Pro series bodies and White Lenses.)
Neuro, can I ask what you were interested in before you started stockpiling lenses and camera gear?
Cheers!
Looking forward to some more less obvious reviews in the future

[neuroanatomist]

Neuro, can I ask what you were interested in before you started stockpiling lenses and camera gear?

Saving money.   

Seriously, I shot film long ago, developed lots of Tmax and printed back when burning and dodging meant wands and masks under an enlarger.  Then it was film P&S, then digital P&S, then I had a child, and once she started moving the P&S just couldn't keep up.  So that re-ignited my hobby...only now my income is more conducive.  It was a little eye opening to think that the 600 II cost more than my gross income for a whole year as a grad student...

[EchoLocation]

I'm just enjoying thinking of Neuro using the 600 II as a lens for family shots......
"Okay kids, you stand on this side of the Grand Canyon, I'll be back at home on CR taking family portraits of you from the window. Smile!"

[tnargs]

"As for hybrid IS, Its really only useful at 1:1 or near 1:1 focusing distances. Perfect for macro lenses"

Thank you for educating me on that feature.

That is a very poorly worded comment.

What it should have said is,

"Hybrid is every bit as useful as conventional IS in a myriad of circumstances, possibly even slightly better,  but additionally it is useful at 1:1 or near 1:1 focusing distances, where conventional IS loses about half to 3/4 of its effectiveness".

That's better.

[tnargs]

Anybody here owning 100L and 135L?
Comparison of my copies make clear winner 135 @ F2.8. Do you have any opposite experience?

Does your 100L have IS?

[RLPhoto]

"As for hybrid IS, Its really only useful at 1:1 or near 1:1 focusing distances. Perfect for macro lenses"

Thank you for educating me on that feature.

That is a very poorly worded comment.

What it should have said is,

"Hybrid is every bit as useful as conventional IS in a myriad of circumstances, possibly even slightly better,  but additionally it is useful at 1:1 or near 1:1 focusing distances, where conventional IS loses about half to 3/4 of its effectiveness".

That's better.

I love quotes taken out of context. 

[AshtonNekolah]

one of my best tele's compare to the 135L the 135 bokeh is more buttery due to its 2/f but the 100mm rocks tops in its class of 2.8 and for macro its nothing but sharp all the way. one of the sharpest macro L glass out there. im happy to own this gem.

[Dylan777]

I have never owned nor tried a macro lens before, but after reading this review and comments from CR members........dam I want one

[GMCPhotographics]

It makes me laugh when reviewers of the newer lenses state that they feel plasticy compared to older lenses. Canon have recently started using Aluminium in their casing designs and once coated, this metal doesn't feel cold to touch like the older metal formulas employed. So most people think that the casing for this lens is made from engineering plastic, when it's mostly made from a far better material. The same is true for sections of the new 24-70IIL and 8-16L fisheye.

[JVLphoto]

While I appreciate the reviews, it seems like this is an absolute no brainer.
Everyone knows this lens is awesome... It's basically a fact at this point.
Looking forward to some more less obvious reviews in the future

We're working on producing reviews of new lenses, but also filling in the gaps on older ones too, nobody says you need to read the ones that are a foregone conclusion to you, since not everyone knows everything about every lens... or maybe some people do.  I'm looking forward to getting at some lenses I've never used, while I still have to write reviews on others I'm not particularly interested in.

[JVLphoto]

It makes me laugh when reviewers of the newer lenses state that they feel plasticy compared to older lenses. Canon have recently started using Aluminium in their casing designs and once coated, this metal doesn't feel cold to touch like the older metal formulas employed. So most people think that the casing for this lens is made from engineering plastic, when it's mostly made from a far better material. The same is true for sections of the new 24-70IIL and 8-16L fisheye.

I'm with you, actually, I'm fine with the coating and appreciate the lessened weight - but I know if I DON'T mention it, someone will call me out on it.

[rpt]

+1 - it's wickedly sharp.

How did you do this one? Macro tubes? Could you describe it?

Thanks.

[JVLphoto]

 

I love quotes taken out of context. 

Welcome to my life.

[neuroanatomist]

+1 - it's wickedly sharp.

How did you do this one? Macro tubes? Could you describe it?

That was a 100% crop of this image:


EOS 7D, EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM, 1/60 s, f/8, ISO 400, 430EX II on Manfrotto 233B flash bracket via OC-E3

No tubes, just the bare lens on a 7D.  With the flash bracket, the flash head was right at the end of the lens hood (with a StoFen on the flash).  I was just walking along a trail, and the fly was sitting there on a bush.  I pointed, I clicked...