- Status
"The 180 is an L too"
Mentioned that. Great focal length but too heavy for me.
"When chasing things that move or handshooting then AF and servo is what I use."
I'm not that steady or fast! I do shoot plenty of bugs for my friends at the local natural history museum but we chill the live ones first to slow them down. The dead ones don't move much... I just can't get the sharpness or focal plane I want with hand shooting. AF want to chase or worse, focus where I'm not interested.
"With stationary items using the tripod I focus manually with my laptop tethered and use the EOS utility working through LiveView"
Agreed with LiveView. It's absolutely necessary for macro. The Eg-S is just a good all around screen. I also shoot tethered with a tripod. I use the WFT-4 and an IPAD (Shuttersnitch) to check images and framing. I don't use the EOS utility. I just prefer the IPAD especially outside shooting landscapes. I've gotten so dependent on Shuttersnitch / IPAD that I felt lost doing macro without it (IPAD left behind that day....)
Mentioned that. Great focal length but too heavy for me.
"When chasing things that move or handshooting then AF and servo is what I use."
I'm not that steady or fast! I do shoot plenty of bugs for my friends at the local natural history museum but we chill the live ones first to slow them down. The dead ones don't move much... I just can't get the sharpness or focal plane I want with hand shooting. AF want to chase or worse, focus where I'm not interested.
"With stationary items using the tripod I focus manually with my laptop tethered and use the EOS utility working through LiveView"
Agreed with LiveView. It's absolutely necessary for macro. The Eg-S is just a good all around screen. I also shoot tethered with a tripod. I use the WFT-4 and an IPAD (Shuttersnitch) to check images and framing. I don't use the EOS utility. I just prefer the IPAD especially outside shooting landscapes. I've gotten so dependent on Shuttersnitch / IPAD that I felt lost doing macro without it (IPAD left behind that day....)
Upvote
0
100L hands down. I use it for portraits as well. Super sharp and beautiful images. Best lens I own in my opinion, and I own the 70-200 f/2.8 MK II. I just love this lens.
Upvote
0
Depends what you're taking pics of... Personally I struggled to get decent insect pics at 100mm because they tend to run/fly away...
The sigma 150mm or canon 180mm are much better for not pissing off your subject.
On aps-c the tokina 35mm f2.8 macro was an old favourite of mine. Rubbish for bugs (1:1 magnification is a few cm away from the lens), but great for static subjects and a razor sharp standard prime.
The sigma 150mm or canon 180mm are much better for not pissing off your subject.
On aps-c the tokina 35mm f2.8 macro was an old favourite of mine. Rubbish for bugs (1:1 magnification is a few cm away from the lens), but great for static subjects and a razor sharp standard prime.
Upvote
0
The 100L is a very good Macro lens, a great Portrait lens. Just put it on the camera and you will use it. I use it often and its a versatile all around star.
Upvote
0
I got the 100 f2.8 and liked it a lot, so I ugraded to a 100L but apart from paying double, didnt see much of an IQ improvement, if anything it was less sharp (but still very sharp). I then sold that in a week or so and got the 180L.
I love the 180L, it is decent handheld and shines tripodded. I do not have to crowd the insects and can shoot from a decent distance. Best thing is I don't cast shadows on the subject when I am that close as I did with the 100's.
It is deadly sharp... just to show how sharp, here's a shot I took. The second shot is a crop of the first, yes those are Pollen buds.
This was taken with a 5Diii whose AA filter is stronger than the 5Dii, or it could have been sharper.
However if you want to shoot a lot of hovering/moving insects (not only stationary ones) then the 100L is a good choice. Granted I have not used the Sigma 150mm OS.
I love the 180L, it is decent handheld and shines tripodded. I do not have to crowd the insects and can shoot from a decent distance. Best thing is I don't cast shadows on the subject when I am that close as I did with the 100's.
It is deadly sharp... just to show how sharp, here's a shot I took. The second shot is a crop of the first, yes those are Pollen buds.
This was taken with a 5Diii whose AA filter is stronger than the 5Dii, or it could have been sharper.
However if you want to shoot a lot of hovering/moving insects (not only stationary ones) then the 100L is a good choice. Granted I have not used the Sigma 150mm OS.
Attachments
Upvote
0
I know you stated you only want "L" glass.... but it is worth mentioning that the 100mm f2.8 non L lens by canon is painfully sharp and versatile. It is almost too sharp for portraits and a little NR to soften the lines actually helps.
To top it off... this is a relatively inexpensive lens. I think I paid $375 for mine second hand. (With a few extension tubes you can get really really close.)
To top it off... this is a relatively inexpensive lens. I think I paid $375 for mine second hand. (With a few extension tubes you can get really really close.)
Upvote
0
I personally went with the 180L lens. I like to be farther away and then later crop, and I can do that with the 22mp 5D Mark III. I'm sure the 100L is fantastic, it's just I don't do a whole lot of macro work, and I like the longer focal length.
Upvote
0
I've got the 100 2.8 non-L and it is painfully sharp! I couldn't imagine the L version being any sharper. However, I use the 180 3.5L and it is my "goto" lens of choice. Sharp, sharp, sharp and the bokeh is superb at this focal length! Heavier by far than the 100, but worth the weight for the performance.
Upvote
0
I have owned both EF100 2.8 & EF100 2.8L - both are very sharp.
I traded in my 100L for a couple of extra studio lights I needed at the time and a few months later bought the non L version to fill the gap. It's IQ is superb and as I do not need IS or weather sealing for my macro work, I'm going to keep it in my kit.
To answer OP's question, I'd suggest the 100L as OP only wants an L lens.
Cheers
I traded in my 100L for a couple of extra studio lights I needed at the time and a few months later bought the non L version to fill the gap. It's IQ is superb and as I do not need IS or weather sealing for my macro work, I'm going to keep it in my kit.
To answer OP's question, I'd suggest the 100L as OP only wants an L lens.
Cheers
Upvote
0
I honestly love the 100mm 2.8l IS. The IS works great for handheld but you better use a tripod for 1:1. Also you better manual focus at 1:1. Other than that its amazing and you really cannot fault it for those two things since all macros are that way. I looked at the 100mm 2.8 non-L version when deciding and to be honest, I have never once felt regret after getting the 2.8L lens in my hand.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
