The NEW EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM..

onform

onform

Messages
2,860
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Can you buy it yet?

Anyone know when it is available?

This looks to be a cracking lens..
 
rayman64 said:
got the older version thats got IS its called a tripod lol it does look a nice bit of kit though
Click to expand...

unless you are mainly doing floral photography or studio portraits it is an issue. Even Manfrotto tripod is pain to set up at ground level, and with bugs it is nearly impossible to set up on time (unless you also use pins :gag:). f/2.8 sharpness and saturation should be better with L glass too.
 
Blimey! At that price I'll stay with my standard 100 f/2.8 Macro. Rip-off Britain yet again.
 
daugirdas said:
unless you are mainly doing floral photography or studio portraits it is an issue. Even Manfrotto tripod is pain to set up at ground level, and with bugs it is nearly impossible to set up on time (unless you also use pins :gag:). f/2.8 sharpness and saturation should be better with L glass too.
Click to expand...

I have the non IS version, and I would like IS but mainly for when I'm not using it as a Macro lens I think.

I'm new to Macro, but I've found that you need flash and an aperture of around f8 to get a bit of depth of field. I don't use autofocus but set the focus and then move the camera relative to the subject to get the bit I want in focus. Flash sets the shutter at 1/250th which is enough to get away from shake at 100mm focal length isn't it?

I've not had the lens all that long and so I can't claim brilliant results but I'm sure it must be possible to get them without IS.

Perhaps I'm wrong. Do other Macro lenses already have IS?
 
trapper501 said:
I have the non IS version, and I would like IS but mainly for when I'm not using it as a Macro lens I think.

I'm new to Macro, but I've found that you need flash and an aperture of around f8 to get a bit of depth of field. I don't use autofocus but set the focus and then move the camera relative to the subject to get the bit I want in focus. Flash sets the shutter at 1/250th which is enough to get away from shake at 100mm focal length isn't it?

I've not had the lens all that long and so I can't claim brilliant results but I'm sure it must be possible to get them without IS.

Perhaps I'm wrong. Do other Macro lenses already have IS?
Click to expand...

Nikon has 105mm VR micro lens. http://imaging.nikon.com/products/i...o/af-s_vr_micro-nikkor_105mmf_28_if/index.htm - 14 elements in 12 groups (1 ED glass and 1 Nano Crystal Coat-deposited lens elements). I'd expect it to be optically superior to the original 100mm macro, and comparable with the L.
It doesn't cost £1k either, 'only' £590.

Even if you use flash (which I do mostly) it may be difficult get the exact composition you wanted due to lens movement.
 
IS / VR is pointless in a macro lens.

The main issue with macro is shallow depth of field. If you are handholding you are more likely to sway backwards and forwards - therefore going go outside your tiny depth of field.

IS only counters x or y axis shake not forward / backward motion.
 
puddleduck said:
IS / VR is pointless in a macro lens.

The main issue with macro is shallow depth of field. If you are handholding you are more likely to sway backwards and forwards - therefore going go outside your tiny depth of field.

IS only counters x or y axis shake not forward / backward motion.
Click to expand...

It is true. However the chances of sharp photo and proper composition are greatly increased by having IS. And to be honest, I am using my 100mm for many other things including portraits and concerts. It could be a real contender to 135mm f/2L.
 
I have to say they are taking the **** at that price..I doubt the L will be any sharper than the old version and you are paying £600 for IS.
Rip Off
 
daugirdas said:
And to be honest, I am using my 100mm for many other things including portraits and concerts.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you need the 85mm f/1.8 to me then. Not a relatively slow f/2.8 lens.... don't see how IS is going to help either there, for concerts you need shutter speed to freeze subject motion.
 
I give in sometimes, been looking for a macro lens for a while as it is one area where I would like to improve in.
I am starting to wonder if there will ever be a time where we don't have to pay prices that are sky high for everything!

Is there a flip side? Is anything cheaper over here then in other countries?
I bet that figure would be a mere fraction, compared to the stuff thats cheaper away from the UK.
 
puddleduck said:
Sounds like you need the 85mm f/1.8 to me then. Not a relatively slow f/2.8 lens.... don't see how IS is going to help either there, for concerts you need shutter speed to freeze subject motion.
Click to expand...

85mm is somewhere towards the end of my buying list... Sometimes it is good to be able to get in really close. I don't call f/2.8 slow either. 70-200mm f/2.8 is widely used for weddings and concerts.
 
Remember we are still talking about RRP on a new product. The current 100mm macro is RRP £610 and sells for £425 on CPB, so applying the same RRP to actual price ratio to the new lens makes it £700.

It comes with a lens hood and should be better quality and has this new trick angular and linear hybrid IS system. At £700 it seems pretty reasonable to me.
 
grumpybadger said:
Remember we are still talking about RRP on a new product. The current 100mm macro is RRP £610 and sells for £425 on CPB, so applying the same RRP to actual price ratio to the new lens makes it £700.

It comes with a lens hood and should be better quality and has this new trick angular and linear hybrid IS system. At £700 it seems pretty reasonable to me.
Click to expand...

If it is anything like the new 24mm and 17mm TSE lenses, then RRP could be what it will cost. :bang:
 
grumpybadger said:
It comes with a lens hood and should be better quality and has this new trick angular and linear hybrid IS system. At £700 it seems pretty reasonable to me.
Click to expand...

That seems very expensive for what it is.

You can get perfect good macro lenses for £50. OK they are not AF or IS, but something like a Tamron or Tokina 90mm f/2.5 are superb, and really a lot of folks do MF for macro when AF (and certainly not IS!) isn't needed.

A bit of pespective is needed - when something at £700 (RRP £1000!) is seen as "reasonable", I think the plot has been lost a bit.

You don't need to spend anywhere close to £700 to do macro.
 
puddleduck said:
That seems very expensive for what it is.

You can get perfect good macro lenses for £50. OK they are not AF or IS, but something like a Tamron or Tokina 90mm f/2.5 are superb, and really a lot of folks do MF for macro when AF (and certainly not IS!) isn't needed.

A bit of pespective is needed - when something at £700 (RRP £1000!) is seen as "reasonable", I think the plot has been lost a bit.

You don't need to spend anywhere close to £700 to do macro.
Click to expand...

Agree, like you don't need a 1Ds or A900 to take photos.

What I am saying is that for a top lens, with top optics and a new IS, it stands up pretty well against the competition

Bearing in mind that the Canon 180mm macro is £1135 and the Nikon 200mm is £1026. I know you can say that is a different focal length but you can do macro much more expensively and much cheaper.

You don't value IS for macro - fine. Don't buy it. It won't fit your camera anyway. I do see value in IS for macro if you are trying to work in the field with wild subjects. Not all the time but it is another string to the bow.

Will I be selling my Sigma 150mm macro? Not in a hurry but I think I could change in time.

I'm surprised with the amount you've obviously spent in kit over your time on this forum that you are such a strong preponent of the £50 macro solution.
 
grumpybadger said:
I'm surprised with the amount you've obviously spent in kit over your time on this forum that you are such a strong preponent of the £50 macro solution.
Click to expand...

I'll lend you a 55mm f/2.8 AI-S or Tamron 90mm f/2.5 if you want?

Serious offer.
 
Would love to see results. Problem is that, particularly on full frame, I needed the reach which is why I ended up with the Sigma 150. Couldn't bring myself to stump up for the Canon 180...

I've no doubt there are some great lenses around and love the fact that, with the Nikon system, you can use old MF lenses on modern bodies. Being a Canon-ite, I can't take you up on your offer unfortunately.

If I end up getting an EOS-Oly adaptor (I'm looking for a decent WA for landscapes) then I will investigate what Zuiko lenses are available for macro.
 
grumpybadger said:
I've no doubt there are some great lenses around and love the fact that, with the Nikon system, you can use old MF lenses on modern bodies. Being a Canon-ite, I can't take you up on your offer unfortunately.
Click to expand...

The Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 is still the reference lens for Nikkor macro lenses. 20 year old design.. still being made today.

And the Tamron 90mm - well everyone knows how good that is, which is why that lens line has been going for around 30 years and still going strong.

My point being - a lot of macro (the majority?) is done with manual focus - and ideally on a tripod, so a this is one of those areas where I feel quite strongly that bells and whistles are definately not required for good results. And not when it comes at such a premium.
 
puddleduck said:
My point being - a lot of macro (the majority?) is done with manual focus - and ideally on a tripod, so a this is one of those areas where I feel quite strongly that bells and whistles are definately not required for good results. And not when it comes at such a premium.
Click to expand...

If your work allows using the tripod then it is great. Some things move (bugs, or flowers in the wind), and to me AF and even the AI-servo focusing are really helpful and very accurate. I use MF maybe 10% of the time or less.

Edit: IS the new one compatible with 1.4x TC? This would be very nice...
 
It's a showcase lens for Canon's new hybrid IS, which has benefits for macro. It is surely extremely good, will get wall to wall rave reviews, and kudos for Canon - especially when compared to the Nikon 105mm VR macro. Job done. And they will surely sell a few to gear heads.

Whether or not it takes better macro photos is kind of moot IMHO. But there is no doubt that camera shake at 1:1 is a major headache and even if you use flash to freeze movement, anything that helps to stabilise the viewfinder for framing and composition, when the image is leaping about all over the place and movement of a few mms is the difference between a great image and a useless blur, has got to be worth having :thumbs:

This is a major benefit of in-lens stabilisation over in-camera systems. Sony use the latter type, which can make their users even more grumpy than badgers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top