100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 … 8 9 end

Archive 2009 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

It seems like there is no magic in this glass and it got low photozone score. I am glad i canceled my Amazon pre-order for it. Also another proof of needless IS for lens shorter than 200mm even with 4 stops/hybrid or whatever they called this ...

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/458-canon_100_28is_5d

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:05 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

They scored a macro lens lower (I wouldn't consider that a low score at all) because of bokeh fringing and other performance at f/2.8...that's like scoring an UWA lower because of poor corner sharpness at f/2.8. It has been said that the optical quality is on par with the original, the cost difference is due to the addition of an IS system and the L designation, which includes weather sealing/BQ. The implementation IS is enough for many to buy this lens and should be a main determining factor. Aside from that how many samples were tested by photozone?

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:12 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
They scored a macro lens lower because of bokeh fringing at f/2.8...that's like scoring an UWA lower because of poor corner sharpness at f/2.8. It has been said that the optical quality is on par with the original, the cost difference is due to the addition of an IS system and the L designation, which includes weather sealing/BQ. The implementation IS is enough for many to buy this lens and should be a main determining factor. Aside from that how many samples were tested by photozone?

Lens didn't get High Recommendation in photozone, that is also means something to many. Especially upsetting since new technology inside.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:16 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
Also another proof of needless IS for lens shorter than 200mm even with 4 stops/hybrid or whatever they called this ...

Spoken from someone who clearly has no experience shooting macro and no understanding of IS.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:17 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
Lens didn't get High Recommendation in photozone, that is also means something to many. Especially upsetting since new technology inside.

Do you understand what you are saying or didn't you read the review? The lens scored high with an exception of performance wide open, which is negligible from a macro standpoint.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:19 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Lens didn't get High Recommendation in photozone, that is also means something to many. Especially upsetting since new technology inside.

Do you understand what you are saying or didn't you read the review? The lens scored high with an exception of performance wide open, which is negligible from a macro standpoint.

I believe you like arguing lot, I prefer not too especially with Vers, do you know who is this? Also I am speaking for last page of photozone review where normally word verdict is posted. Did you saw it? So, call Vers about ...

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:22 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Also another proof of needless IS for lens shorter than 200mm even with 4 stops/hybrid or whatever they called this ...

Spoken from someone who clearly has no experience shooting macro and no understanding of IS.

, I believe Vers does ...

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:23 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
I believe you like arguing lot, I prefer not too especially with Vers, do you know who is this? Also I am speaking for last page of photozone review where normally word verdict is posted. Did you saw it? So, call Vers about ...

Again, you clearly have little understanding of what you are speaking about. I'll leave it at that.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:23 PM

davidrwilliams
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
Also another proof of needless IS for lens shorter than 200mm even with 4 stops/hybrid or whatever they called this ...

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/458-canon_100_28is_5d

Interesting conclusion, albeit personal rather than one stated in the review.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:24 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
I believe you like arguing lot, I prefer not too especially with Vers, do you know who is this? Also I am speaking for last page of photozone review where normally word verdict is posted. Did you saw it? So, call Vers about ...

Again, you clearly have little understanding of what you are speaking about. I'll leave it at that.

Again, you are clearly protecting something got not perfect score in very reputable site ...

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:25 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

davidrwilliams wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Also another proof of needless IS for lens shorter than 200mm even with 4 stops/hybrid or whatever they called this ...

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/458-canon_100_28is_5d

Interesting conclusion, albeit personal rather than one stated in the review.

You might need to compare it with 135L lens review as example:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/430-canon_135_2_5d?start=2

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:27 PM

PetKal
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Canon has been keeping their IS module as a sort of a trump card when they need to improve return on warmed-over lenses as well as new lens models.
No doubt, that IS should work very well, and for some folks that sorta "electronic tripod" is a real boon to their photography.

If I was into hand-held macro photography I could probably justify the acquisition of the new lens for IS alone. However, since I am not, a new red-necked and image stabilized short telephoto lens with the same optical qualities as the old one, yet twice as expensive, holds no appeal.
Sorry, Canon boys, you've failed again to get my money.

Edited on Oct 17, 2009 at 06:31 PM · View previous versions

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:29 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
Again, you are clearly protecting something got not perfect score in very reputable site ...

Based on the fact the ONLY reason it scored lower than it should have is because of performance wide open, which again is completely negligible for MACRO work, which is what the lens is designed for. I am not "protecting" anything rather pointing out insignificant points both you and photozone present.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:29 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Again, you are clearly protecting something got not perfect score in very reputable site ...

Based on the fact the ONLY reason it scored lower than it should have is because of performance wide open, which again is completely negligible for MACRO work, which is what the lens is designed for. I am not "protecting" anything rather pointing out insignificant points both you and photozone present.

The word ONLY somehow lowered to you but not to me. It is not Highly Recommended as any close competitors are (135L, 100mm macro non-L), that is fact and very important for lot of people reading this reviews. So, read review and ask photozone not me why you don't agree with it.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:33 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

PetKal wrote:
Canon has been keeping their IS module as a sort of a trump card when they need to improve return on warmed-over lenses as well as new lens models.
No doubt, that IS should work very well, and for some folks that sorta "electronic tripod" is a real boon to their photography.

If I was into hand-held macro photography I could probably justify the acquisition of the new lens for IS alone. However, since I am not, a new red-necked and image stabilized short telephoto lens with the same optical qualities as the old one, yet twice as expensive, holds no appeal.
Sorry, Canon boys, you've failed again to get my money.

"electronic tripod"

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:34 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
Lens didn't get High Recommendation in photozone...

Breitling65 wrote:
It is not Highly Recommended as any close competitors are (135L, 100mm macro non-L), that is fact and very important for lot of people reading this reviews. So, read review and ask photozone not me why you don't agree with it.

Ready to eat some crow?
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/461-canon_100_28is_50d?start=1

Edited on Oct 17, 2009 at 06:36 PM · View previous versions

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:35 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Lens didn't get High Recommendation in photozone...

Ready to eat some crow?
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/461-canon_100_28is_50d?start=1

APC-S, I didn't mention this in original post. FF is what I care for.

Edited on Oct 17, 2009 at 06:37 PM · View previous versions

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:36 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
APC-S

OK, where was the original 100/2.8 Macro tested on FF on Photozone...mind presenting a link to such a review?

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:37 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Lens didn't get High Recommendation in photozone...

Ready to eat some crow?
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/461-canon_100_28is_50d?start=1

APC-S

OK, where was the original 100/2.8 Macro tested on FF on Photozone...mind presenting a link to such a review?

Read 135L as I suggested, it has FF review. Also prefer not to talk to Vers, dono why I did this.

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:38 PM

M Vers
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Breitling65 wrote:
Read 135L as I suggested, it has FF review. Also prefer not to talk to Vers, dono why I did this.

Oh, I could have sworn you compared it to the 100/2.8...
Breitling65 wrote:
It is not Highly Recommended as any close competitors are (135L, 100mm macro non-L),

Give it a rest...

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:40 PM

Breitling65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #21 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Read 135L as I suggested, it has FF review. Also prefer not to talk to Vers, dono why I did this.

Oh, I could have sworn you compared it to the 100/2.8...
Breitling65 wrote:
It is not Highly Recommended as any close competitors are (135L, 100mm macro non-L),

Give it a rest...

Again, are you having problems understanding photozone review and verdicts? I am not their employee, contact them and ask and argue. Tell them about your need of "electronic tripod" and how good IS for you and why they didn't do Highly Recommended word for it.

Edited on Oct 17, 2009 at 06:59 PM · View previous versions

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:41 PM

15Bit
Online
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #22 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Oooh, forum tennis.

Anyone bring strawberries?

Oct 17, 2009 at 06:43 PM

Ian.Dobinson
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #23 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

I have the Popcorn and and a large Coke at my side.

Nothing on Tele and the GP qualy seems to be going on forever so this good be good entertainment

Oct 17, 2009 at 07:31 PM

davidrwilliams
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #24 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

Ok, folks - time to calm down.

Perhaps a user review to soothe the nerves....

http://blog.martinbaileyphotography.com/2009/10/06/podcast-211-canon-ef-100mm-f2-8-l-macro-is-usm-lens-review/

Oct 17, 2009 at 08:24 PM

retrofocus
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #25 · 100L macro - low scores in photozone tests

M Vers wrote:
Breitling65 wrote:
Lens didn't get High Recommendation in photozone, that is also means something to many. Especially upsetting since new technology inside.

Do you understand what you are saying or didn't you read the review? The lens scored high with an exception of performance wide open, which is negligible from a macro standpoint.

Not quite true. There are some situations in macro shooting where a wide open aperture is needed. I took a lot of flower blossom shots at f2.8 and faster (with 50 f1.4 and extension tube) just to keep the center of the blossom sharp and let it blur outside on the petals. So yes, the photozone test is not fully out of specs here.

Oct 17, 2009 at 08:25 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 8 9 end