Canon EF 100 f/2.8L IS Macro autofocus?

[Rams_eos]

First, with this macro, it is unlikely you shoot fast moving objects. So first thing is to limit the AF range with the button on the side of the lens.

I took pictures of Orchids yesterday and I am very pleased with results but: I mounted the camera on tripod, connected it to the computer, used canon software to control it, adjusted focus manually directly on the computer screen, same for DOF (I use a DOF calculator on android to get an idea before start) and exposition.
I use one shot AF on a 600D. You need to have an idea of the DOF you need before starting.
In my case here, F8 to 10 (to get all flowers sharp), speed 1/50, iso 200.

Outdoor, you should really limit the range of AF otherwise it has to go all way long and it take some time.
One key point is very very thin DOF. It is very easy to get fuzzy images because a light front or back focus combined with a narrow DOF will lead to overall blurred pictures.
For non moving bugs without tripod, I tend to use 2s self-delay to be stable, use lower speed and get extra sharpness.

This lens is amazingly sharp as long as you use it properly i.e. adapt to its limitations.

 

[Rams_eos]

Just to add that if you shoot flowers outside with wind even light, they will be moving and be out of focus unless you shoot from several meters and F16 or more. But then, is this still macro?

 

[100]

The hybrid IS on the EF 100 f/2.8L will “only” get you something between 1 and 1.5 stops stabilization at macro distances, so if you shoot handheld the lowest you can go is about 1/30 sec (if your subject doesn’t move that is). At normal distances the IS will give you 3 to 4 stops.

This has been discussed a lot, and my experience is that at 1:1 macro the effect of IS is about ... zero. It gets better the more you distance the camera from the subject, but the IS is really best starting with your typical "full flower" shot type.

Did you compare it to the non IS lens?
I never owned the old non IS 100mm Canon but I use to have both the old non-OS Sigma 105mm f/2.8 and the EF 100 f/2.8L IS. I couldn’t use the siggie handheld with natural light at macro distances at 1/30 second on full frame. 1/60 or faster was needed. With the canon 1/30 at macro distances is possible for me (not preferable though).

You only get 1:1 at the minimum focus distance and because of the optical construction it isn’t really a 100 mm lens anymore, but if the effectiveness of the stabilization is close to zero you need close to 1/100 on FF (or 1/160 on APS-C) if you apply the rule of thumb (minimum shutter speed in seconds = 1/ real focal length in mm * crop factor).

 

[100]

Just to add that if you shoot flowers outside with wind even light, they will be moving and be out of focus unless you shoot from several meters and F16 or more. But then, is this still macro?

That depends on the wind direction. If the wind blows form left to right or vice versa they stay in focus.

There is more than one definition for macro photography. The most used define the reproduction ratio to at least 1:2 (half life size).

 

[Marsu42]

But then, is this still macro?

"Macro" is often used as a synonym for "rather small object", but the afaik proper definition is that the macro lens engages its specialized mechanism, raising the magnification while dropping the usable aperture - the latter effect makes handholding so damn difficult except at ridiculously high iso or thin dof.

This has been discussed a lot, and my experience is that at 1:1 macro the effect of IS is about ... zero. It gets better the more you distance the camera from the subject, but the IS is really best starting with your typical "full flower" shot type.

Did you compare it to the non IS lens?
[/quote]

Yes, I did because I used to shoot a lot with the 100 non-L, and then "upgraded" because it lacks sealing which is bad for outdoor shots... that's why I feel confident to say that the closer the distance is, the less the effect of IS gets until virtually zero, though it makes a soothing IS sound :->

You can check for yourself by handholding the lens @1:1 with and w/o IS and then look at how much the frame shakes, at very closeup you simply need a fast shutter speed to prevent blur when shooting w/o tripod.

 

[100]

You can check for yourself by handholding the lens @1:1 with and w/o IS and then look at how much the frame shakes, at very closeup you simply need a fast shutter speed to prevent blur when shooting w/o tripod.

Well, I did and the IS gives me little over 1 stop at 1:1 like I wrote before.
At 1:1 it’s only a 75mm lens (source: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/458-canon_100_28is_5d ) so 1/75 second handheld on full frame complies with the rule of thumb. Not everyone shakes the same but for me this rule works pretty well with normal shooting conditions. 1/30 is the lowest workable speed for handheld shots at 1:1 in my case.

If you read the reviews they all seem to reach similar conclusions (two examples below):

Digital Picture:
IS is not as effective at macro distances. Canon rates this IS system for 3 stops of assistance at .5x/2:1 and 2 stops of assistance at 1x/1:1. Testing IS completely handheld at 1x/1:1 is not easy - it is very hard to even keep the subject in focus when shooting completely freehand at this short distance. That said, at 1x with IS on, I get a good keeper rate at a shutter speed of 1/30 second and a few at 1/15. That is close to two stops for me.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx

Depreview:
Of course the big story with this lens is Canon's new Hybrid IS, and it's important to understand the system's strengths and weaknesses. We found it highly effective at longer subject distances - under ideal conditions it delivers on the four stops benefit promised by Canon - but despite the new dual-sensor design it still doesn't provide so much benefit at close distances. At 1:1 we found it delivered little more than a stop of stabilization - better than nothing for sure, but it's not going to help with the relatively long exposures often required when shooting macros at F11 or F16.
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_100_2p8_is_usm_c16/6

For you the effectiveness of the IS at 1:1 might be close to zero, I have no reason to doubt your words, but you seem to be an exception.

 

[Loswr]

You can check for yourself by handholding the lens @1:1 with and w/o IS and then look at how much the frame shakes, at very closeup you simply need a fast shutter speed to prevent blur when shooting w/o tripod.

Well, I did and the IS gives me little over 1 stop at 1:1 like I wrote before.

I get pretty close to two stops, on average, at 1:1.

@Marsu42 - does ML have an algorithm to fix shaky hands yet?

 

[Marsu42]

@Marsu42 - does ML have an algorithm to fix shaky hands yet?

You'd be surprised - it does, though you big 1d people wouldn't know about it

It's called "handheld mlu" and works by adding a little delay after pressing shutter and in addition to that engaging mlu since there's time for it. The result is that you can stabilize the lens better since you don't have the minimal imbalance from the shutter press action anymore, it works great with longer landscape exposures on non-IS lenses like the 17-40L.

For you the effectiveness of the IS at 1:1 might be close to zero, I have no reason to doubt your words, but you seem to be an exception.

In that case I have to doubt my own words and have to add that I didn't run the statistical tests to really prove my observation, that would require a lot of shots of the same subject with IS on and off to compensate for the always different hand shake.

But I have used the L vs. non L and IS vs no IS quite enough to say that if your 1:1 macro shot is too shaky with IS off, IS won't rescue me, even the 1 stop observed above is only "nice to have" but I can easily get better results by simply taking 2-3 other shots and chose the best. I admit I leave IS on, but for the one reason that I often move out a bit to re-frame and get in the region when it's actually useful.

 

[kirispupis]

Sorry to be blunt, but for macro shots AF doesn't really matter because it should be turned off. For macro when you focus you are actually changing the magnification - which usually is not what you want. The most common technique for macro focus is to turn AF off and move the lens itself backwards and forwards. For this reason many macro lenses do not even have AF (such as the MP-E 65).

I have this lens and only use AF for portrait situations - which are rare (I am photographing some flower and the kids suddenly want a picture). I certainly would not call it stellar - but at least on my copy it does an OK job.

However for your best results I highly recommend you just turn AF off. If you are doing tripod based work with a macro rail, then live view is useful. Otherwise I have found it possible to focus accurately just using the viewfinder.

 

[slclick]

I'm curious to know just how much Macro folks that are recommending using AF are doing? It's a sizable part of my portfolio and AF isn't ever part of the equation.

Um, can't the lens be used in many different modes for many different things? If I'm shooting at macro distances or products, I'm on a tripod and manual. If I'm using the lens for other things, I may use that handy modern AF feature that's included for free in my lens. Not sure why you are trying to call people out because they may use their tools differently than you.

Where did you read in my post about other things? I wasn't calling people out either. I wasn't being antagonistic, but I do think you are. I was talking about 1:1 macro

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I'm curious to know just how much Macro folks that are recommending using AF are doing? It's a sizable part of my portfolio and AF isn't ever part of the equation.

I'm a person who likes to walk around and shoot whatever catches my interest, or grab the camera to get a quick shot. Using a tripod or macro rail is something I'm too impatient to do, and its pretty much impractical for quickly moving subjects in any event.

While not perfect, the 100L allows me to use autofocus most of the time.
I use AI servo, of course, since I can not hold completely still, and moving forward or back just a tiny amount makes a big difference.


Examples of shots using autofocus.

 

[danski0224]

I also like macro photography.

I much prefer a monopod to a tripod, but that fits in with what I take pictures of most of the time. Tripod and/or rail is really for stationary subjects, or for those that wait for the bugs to come to them- as one example I saw one guy taking pictures of monarchs with what looked like a 600mm lens on a 1D series body on a tripod. I doubt that lens has a macro setting, but he probably filled the frame

Little bits of wind can be a huge problem. AF can help. AI Servo can help. Multiple frames can help.

Little changes in AF make big magnification changes- just something to be aware of.

Yes, sometimes I turn off the AF, set the lens at 1:1 and move in/out until focus is achieved. Little bits of movement make a big difference.

Probably my most used tool is the monopod followed by the lens collar. Even having the end of the monopod way off to the side in contact with the ground stabilizes the camera enough for me when the same shot purely handheld would have been much more difficult or not possible.

I have also noticed "odd" focus behavior once in a while and I'm not sure what causes it- it isn't repeatable in my case. It could simply be that the AF system is operating near the limitations of the system. The Canon f2.8 macro doesn't use the f2.8 AF points and I'm not sure what AF points the Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro uses.


Edits: monarchs = monarch butterflies, not royalty

back button focus is a huge help for macro in general.

 

[Gino]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone. I haven't had a chance to implement your suggestions, but here are a few photos I took prior to getting your feedback.

thanks

 

[danski0224]

Don't really see anything "wrong" with those images.

 

[ejenner]

It's not the best AFing lens in poor light either. Dim, indoors, it can struggle a bit.

In decent light (even dreary heavily overcast outdoors) I have used it fine with bees and the like - as long as you don't try to go from 20ft to 1ft instantly.