I have had three non L 100's and they lacked the crisp detail. They were ok but not great. I bought the 100 L and it is great. Much better image quality. I think the IS is fairly worthless and not recommended at all for macro according to Canon. My photo's are noticeably sharper with the IS turned off.
dan101 wrote:
I have had three non L 100's and they lacked the crisp detail. They were ok but not great. I bought the 100 L and it is great. Much better image quality. I think the IS is fairly worthless and not recommended at all for macro according to Canon. My photo's are noticeably sharper with the IS turned off.
Inverse handhold rule though
Turn it on when you go below ss 1/100 handheld
IS is incredible on this lens when on FF you can get ss 1/8 - ie, 4 stops
It is a portrait lens too handheld Ss 1/40..ss1/60
I now have the zeiss, and have owned both the L and original 100 2.8 micro lenses. IQ of the 2 Canons is identical. If you need the IS or desire the better build, get the L, if you can do w/o the build and IS, get the original.
Yes, I understand the concept. I have just found I get better results with the IS turned off. It may be just my lenses but I cannot get good result with the IS on any of them. Now on binoculars its a wonderful thing, also on video cameras. It also just may be my sample of the lens but the L lens is so much better than the non L that I wouldn't consider ever using a non L macro again.
Not only is it 100mm on FF but with my 5dc and weak AA filter I'm at zero on the LR slider between F5 and F6.3
Any extra slider sharpening at these settings makes it look too sharp
Sharpest lens on FF that DPReview has ever tested
In real world use i think Cropper is better.
1. mounted on a 7D - the IS is sync with camera for better control of the IS when in macro shooting.
2. naturally more DOF with a cropper sensor.
Ziffl3 wrote:
In real world use i think Cropper is better.
1. mounted on a 7D - the IS is sync with camera for better control of the IS when in macro shooting.
2. naturally more DOF with a cropper sensor.
imho: the findings between a 7D & 1DsII
100mm is much better for portrait shooting than 160 fov on the cropper
The DPReview I posted above - pull up side by side FF vs crop graphs
Some look at this lens as a macro lens but I use my 100L and 50 f1.4 on 5dc for portrait shooting even ISO 1600 and 3200. Sharper eyes and less noise and my process to soften skin when needed.
Macro I use on both and yes it is nice on both
I also use 100L on crop at ISO 1250 to get 160Fov during the flashless ceremony or my 70-200 depending on how much reach I need
The 100L has great bokeh, great 1 ft min focus distance, is fast to focus, is relatively light, and the 4 stop IS is incredible for portrait shooting and getting ss1/40-1/60 handheld
25% of my shots during a wedding day are with this lens
It is a great portrait lens and a great macro lens
This is also my next lens purchase, and I too am in the same debate. I tested both of these at B&H in NY. I would post the samples, but I can't find them anywhere on my computer. I'll tell you my opinion based on what I observed. The easiest way to decide is how often you will use the lens, and in what environment. The regular one is awesome, and takes really sharp pictures. However, it's usually best for situations where you have good light, so it will shine with outdoor natural light. The L is an L, so it's definitely more sturdy and feels solid. It too is awesome and produces really sharp images. I think I remember the bokeh being a tad bit smoother too, but not so much where you can easily tell. It is however awesome in low light situations. The built in IS most definitely helps with low light images. If you know you're going to use it a lot, and not just for macro, in various lighting conditions, go and invest in the L. If you think you'll only use it for detail shots and mostly outdoors, stick with the normal one.
I will say, this particular debate between these two lenses is pretty hard, and I find myself going back and forth all the time... so I'm sure I'll be in your boat when I'm ready to purchase it as well. Best of luck!
BostonGreg wrote:
The Zeiss 100 f/2 ZE is a worthy investment. For weddings, the AF on the Canon is helpful. If you buy Canon, I wouldn't invest in anything but the L series for professional work. Not just IQ is better, but they are built to be work hoses.
I recently rented this lens for a wedding and got some really great, tack sharp, beautifully contrasty images with it. Bonus - it took some killer shots of the altar while I was standing on the choir balcony looking down! Extremely versatile if you can live with manual focus (you will get focus confirmation, which I found to work pretty reliably). I haven't been able to stop dreaming of the lens since returning the rental. Ha!
Wish I'd seen this thread sooner. I have a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens with the ET67 Lens Hood that I bought new and is practically unused that I have been thinking about selling so I can purchase a 17-40 f/4L. It's an excellent lens but I have had little need for it. I prefer the 85 for portraits, and for rare Macro shots, the 28-70 f/2.8L suffices.
