 |
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
|
|
Review Date: Feb 29, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpest Lens I own, 1:1 without extension tube, IF means that the lens doesn't get longer when focused - so it doesn't smash into my jewelry when I focus it, plus it has a good working distance with live subjects.
|
|
Cons:
|
None in my opinion.
|
|
|
Hi -
Bought a Sigma 105mm macro first, to save some money. I shoot jewelry for local clients, and had been using the Canon 50mm macro. As soon as I shot with the Sigma, it went back to B&H - too soft.
So, I bit the bullet and bought the Canon 100mm. Absolutely top notch. USM is NOT slow, as some have suggested. Rather, because the lens has an enormously long focusing range (infinity to lifesize), it APPEARS to be slow. Not to worry, simply engage the focus limiter.
While I agree that the lens collar is expensive, it's the same price as the lens collar for the $800 Canon 70-200mm f/4.0L. Someone suggested that it was a "con" that the collar wasn't included. Lenses of this relatively short telephoto focal length aren't usually candidates for collars anyway. (AND, the 70-200L f/4.0 doesn't come with a collar either!)
One of its best features is that its internal focusing means that it won't get longer as you focus it and scare away live subjects, or smash into stationery subjects, either.
Canon outdid themselves on this one!
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
|
|
Review Date: Feb 29, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpest Lens I own, 1:1 without extension tube, IF means that the lens doesn't get longer when focused - so it doesn't smash into my jewelry when I focus it, plus it has a good working distance with live subjects.
|
|
Cons:
|
None in my opinion.
|
|
|
Hi -
Bought a Sigma 105mm macro first, to save some money. I shoot jewelry local clients, and had been using the Canon 50mm macro. As soon as I shot with the Sigma, it went back to B&H - too soft.
So, I bit the bullet and bought the Canon 100mm. Absolutely top notch. USM is NOT slow, as some have suggested. Rather, because the lens has an enormously long focusing range (infinity to lifesize), it APPEARS to be slow. Not to worry, simply engage the focus limiter.
While I agree that the lens collar is expensive, it's the same price as the lens collar for the $800 Canon 70-200mm f/4.0L. Someone suggested that it was a "con" that the collar wasn't included. Lenses of this relatively short telephoto focal length aren't usually candidates for collars anyway. (AND, the 70-200L f/4.0 doesn't come with a collar either!)
One of its best features is that its internal focusing means that it won't get longer as you focus it and scare away live subjects, or smash into stationery subjects, either.
Canon outdid themselves on this one!
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
Review Date: Feb 29, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,250.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Good zoom range; constant f/2.8 aperture.
|
|
Cons:
|
Image performance on certain cameras.
|
|
|
Hi -
Bought this lens and was fairly happy with its performance on my D60 and its 1.6x factor. Then, bought a 1Ds (full frame) and the lens went up for sale the same day.
I found it nearly impossible to make full frame prints from images shot at 17mm, even at f/8.0; the corners were just plain mushy.
I realize that the 1Ds is merciless with ANY lens perfections, but I would prefer the loss of the convenience of a zoom lens over the loss of image quality, so I bought a Canon 20mm prime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
