December 15, 2017, 10:47:45 PM

Author Topic: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro  (Read 5994 times)

Sabaki

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 765
Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« on: August 25, 2017, 09:52:56 AM »
I think this may be conversation that may be of interest to a few; do we or don't we replace our 100mm L lenses for the upcoming 135mm TS-E L Macro?

Each has 9 aperture blades but the TS-E comes in at nearly twice the weight

The 100mm also stops down to f/2.8 vs f/4.0 but gives up 35mm to the new lens

A biggy may be the native 2:1 advantage the 135 has over the 100mm's 1:1. A further plus would be the tilt & shift offered by the 135mm

If we were to score the two lenses, the new TS-E 135mm may just pip the 100mm but would you replace your 100mm or add in another macro lens to your kit?
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EOS 7D mkII | Canon EF 16-35mmL f/4.0 IS | Canon 24-70mmL f/2.8 II | Canon 70-200mmL f/4.0 IS | Canon TS-E 24mmL f3.5 | Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Canon 100mmL | Canon 400 f/5.6 | Canon MP-E65

canon rumors FORUM

Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« on: August 25, 2017, 09:52:56 AM »

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6595
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2017, 10:09:32 AM »
No I'm looking at it differently, I'm probably going to get the TS-E 90, it has the same 1:2 max reproduction ration and is a more useful focal length for me, and I'll get the 85 f1.4 for the portrait work I do that will also double up as a fine event work tool. The 100L will probably get sold.

Currently I use the 100L as a double duty product and portrait lens, I feel the two will give me more flexibility for both. It will be an expensive upgrade, two expensive lenses for one cheap one, but the only thing that keeps me able to pay the bills is my ability to deliver consistency and quality others don't, the 11-24 has proven to be a great investment in that regard.
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

Sabaki

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 765
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2017, 02:31:17 PM »
Hey Private

So if you dabbled in the macro world, what would you have done? I'm just wondering if the extra weight of the 135 may mean it's less friendly when it comes to handheld macro 🤔
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EOS 7D mkII | Canon EF 16-35mmL f/4.0 IS | Canon 24-70mmL f/2.8 II | Canon 70-200mmL f/4.0 IS | Canon TS-E 24mmL f3.5 | Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Canon 100mmL | Canon 400 f/5.6 | Canon MP-E65

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 21841
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #3 on: August 25, 2017, 03:42:47 PM »
A biggy may be the native 2:1 advantage the 135 has over the 100mm's 1:1. A further plus would be the tilt & shift offered by the 135mm

You've got that backwards (thanks, no doubt, to CRguy's error).  The TS 135/4L has a 0.5x (1:2) max mag, compared to the 1x (1:1) of the 100L.   So you're trading magnification (as well as AF, IS, and weather sealing) for tilt/shift.

I'll definitely be keeping my 100/2.8L macro, although I will consider picking up the 135 TS at some point.
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

LonelyBoy

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 745
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2017, 05:05:34 PM »
Keeping my 100L, definitely.  I have no idea how to use a TS-E...

Drainpipe

  • EOS Rebel 300D
  • ***
  • Posts: 63
  • It's all about the little things.
    • Check out my Instagram!
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #5 on: August 26, 2017, 07:55:48 AM »
I'm very interested in the new TS-E lenses for macro. What I'm looking closely at is the 50mm and the 90mm. The 135mm won't offer that much magnification once you have tubes on it relative to the 50mm. With the 50mm and 68mm of tubes you can get 1.86x mag. The 135mm gets to 1:1 with 68mm of tubes.

The 90mm is a nice compromise between the two. This is the one I think I will be most interested in.

Hey Private

So if you dabbled in the macro world, what would you have done? I'm just wondering if the extra weight of the 135 may mean it's less friendly when it comes to handheld macro 🤔

I'm using the MP-E 65mm for most of my stuff, which weighs 731g. Compared to the TS-E weights (915g-1110g) it's a lightweight. All that mech of the TS comes at a price. Then think that you'll be adding an MT-24EX (or MT-26RT) onto that. It will be a rather heavy setup.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2017, 08:03:01 AM by Drainpipe »
Canon 5DIV, 5DII | MP-E 65mm 1x-5x f/2.8 | 100mm f/2.8 USM | MT-24EX
My macro Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/macrobrice

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 21841
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2017, 08:49:02 AM »
It will be a rather heavy setup.

You just need to man up.   ;)

EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2017, 08:49:02 AM »

keithcooper

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 338
    • Northlight Images
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2017, 08:51:02 AM »
The current TS-E 90 has been one of my macro choices (with tubes) along with the MP-E65

The 135 is of distinct interest for macro and other (larger) product work.

Just put up some tests of the 90 and tubes to give a bit better idea of what T&S can and can't do for those unfamiliar

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/tilt-tubes-macro/

LDS

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1067
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2017, 08:54:24 AM »
The 100L macro has AF and IS. The TS-E are manual focus and no stabilization. While their use cases may overlap in some situations, they are different lenses aimed at different uses.

I often carry around the 100L on excursions for some quick handheld close-ups, while I'm interested in the TS-E, I can't see using one in the same way.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2017, 09:01:30 AM by LDS »

Drainpipe

  • EOS Rebel 300D
  • ***
  • Posts: 63
  • It's all about the little things.
    • Check out my Instagram!
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2017, 09:00:19 AM »
The 100L macro has AF and IS. The TS-E are manual focus and no stabilization. While their use cases may overlap in some situations, they are different lenses aimed at different uses.

I often carry around the 100L on excursions for some quick handheld close-ups, while I'm interested in the TS-E, I can't see using one in the same way.

Serious macro usually is absent of autofocus. Even with tubes that can transfer autofocus, the image becomes too dark for the autofocus system. Manual focus really isn't that hard. I usually set my magnification and then move the camera forward or back to "focus". Trying to move a focus ring while also trying to remain still for razor-thin DoF has a lot of moving parts :P

You just need to man up.   ;)

Your lack of diffusion disgusts me.  ;D
« Last Edit: August 26, 2017, 09:12:34 AM by Drainpipe »
Canon 5DIV, 5DII | MP-E 65mm 1x-5x f/2.8 | 100mm f/2.8 USM | MT-24EX
My macro Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/macrobrice

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 5-1500mm f/1.0L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 13753
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #10 on: August 26, 2017, 05:46:22 PM »
I predict that the 135mm TS-E will be a big seller, but its not a replacement for a 100mm L Macro.  The 1:2 magnification is nice, but I consider a full Macro to be 1:1. 

I likely will not get one, I did not find enough use for my TS-/E 90 to justify the high price. 

danski0224

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1049
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #11 on: August 27, 2017, 08:36:03 AM »
I think this may be conversation that may be of interest to a few; do we or don't we replace our 100mm L lenses for the upcoming 135mm TS-E L Macro?

Each has 9 aperture blades but the TS-E comes in at nearly twice the weight

The 100mm also stops down to f/2.8 vs f/4.0 but gives up 35mm to the new lens

A biggy may be the native 2:1 advantage the 135 has over the 100mm's 1:1. A further plus would be the tilt & shift offered by the 135mm

If we were to score the two lenses, the new TS-E 135mm may just pip the 100mm but would you replace your 100mm or add in another macro lens to your kit?

You may be able to buy 2 or 3 100mm L macro lenses compared to buying one 135mm macro T/S lens...

:)

aceflibble

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 177
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #12 on: August 27, 2017, 10:37:45 AM »
Entirely different lenses for entirely different uses. Typically if you're using a tilt-shift for macro work it's something like product photography where you may need to get something like an entire plate in focus front-to-back, and you can take as much time as you need to get it exactly right. A faster, IS-equipped lens is more along the lines of things you have more limited & unpredictable time and conditions for, such as insects, or grabbing a quick close-up of rings at a wedding, stitched detail at a fashion show, etc. Of course reinforcing that is the fact the 100mm is full 1:1 while the new TS-Es are only 'half-macro', which further suggests the TS-Es being more intended for something like standard product (where you might be working in a smaller studio space so need close-focusing, but not true macro) and the 100mm is more for what we more typically think of 'macro' as being.

So as far as the different functionalities go, I think it should be a pretty easy decision to make. Shooting weddings, events, insects, flowers, or looking for something which can double as a general-purpose telephoto? Get the 100mm. Do you specifically need a tilt-shift? Then the 90mm or 135mm are your only options, and of the two the 90mm should have the most technical-neutral perspective and distortion (or lack of).

It is a little bizarre that one of the new TS-Es is 135mm, which is a focal length more commonly used for portraits and not often used in product photography due to the slight distortion and perspective compression, while 100mm (or equivalent, for larger format systems) is a more typical choice for such things. I can understand why the focal lengths would cause confusion. If I were to snap my fingers and magic up two lenses, I'd be giving the 135mm the IS and faster aperture and the 100mm would be sitting on a tilt-shift mount. But the TS-E 90mm to 100mm should be near-enough to not be noticeably different, and the 100mm for sure works well as a portrait/wedding/event/etc lens, so overall I'd just say hell, forget the TS-E 135mm exists. There are a few very niche uses for a tilt-shift lens longer than 100mm but they're so specialised (other than plain old 'because I can') that if you need it you'd already know it and not be questioning it. (And most of those uses usually rely on larger formats; it could be that Canon didn't bother introducing a longer TS-E until now because the 5DS R is their first camera which can realistically compete with larger formats.)

 
edit: disclaimer: I'm buying 'em all (the 90mm as a replacement for my well-worn existing TS-E 90mm; I already own the 100mm; the 135mm just because I dunno, it might prove fun to mess around with here and there) so I don't really have a horse in this race, so to speak.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #12 on: August 27, 2017, 10:37:45 AM »

krisbell

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • My Flickr Page
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2017, 12:43:56 PM »
Your lack of diffusion disgusts me.  ;D

+1

Lol - I saw the first picture and was thinking the exact same thing, and then scrolled down to see this. Great minds think alike...but I guess simple ones do too!
Current gear: Canon 5DIII, Canon 100mm f2.8 macro (broken), Canon 16-35mm f4L, Canon 300mm f2.8L II, 2x extender III

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kristianbell/

chrysoberyl

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 707
  • 6D
Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2017, 03:04:44 PM »
@ Drainpipe: may we have a front view of your rig?  And is that a MP-E with an extender?
6D, 80D, 5D IV, Zeiss Milvus 100mm Makro, Sigma 180mm/2.8 macro, Canon 100mm macro, Canon 24mm/1.4, Sigma 35/1.4, Tokina 16-28, Canon 1.4X III TC, Canon 2X III TC, Rokinon 14mm 2.4, Sigma 135mm ART.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro vs Canon TS-E f/4.0 L Macro
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2017, 03:04:44 PM »