Somehow my reply got "lost".
I have the EF version since it came out. Same lens...I love it! since it has an USM motor you can use "MF" while still in an "AF" mode. I use it all the time for my butterfly exhibits photos or Roses....
Yes the AF when up close can get "whacky" BUT I have the option(in camera or with fingers) of fine tuning in MF with the lens focus ring.
These compositions look excellent Joel! Not "blowing smoke up your "six" but the lines are well defined and crisp. POF seems to be "dead on". Yes I see a sort of oof haze but the center pof looks fine to me.
Is there a specific issue you are concerned with?
Dan
f11, 1/40, ISO3200, EV+.67
Yes the light is very low....raw file f11, 1/1000, ISO260, EV0.0
Thanks Dan for the insight to the lens. I will mess with the MF while auto focusing. I just dont know the lens yet and wanted feedback. I thought the pics looked really different from anything I have ever done. Really an interesting lens and I think some really cool stuff will come out of it. Thanks again.
I use the RF 100 macro lens quite a bit on an ancient Canon R5. It's the only RF lens I own (for now). My subjects are mostly product type images and the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod and always manual focus. I have been very satisfied with the performance of this lens. I WAS using the ef 100 f2.8 lens. no L, no IS, no USM...quite ancient....so this was a huge "upgrade" for me.
Your images are all quite nice. Are they handheld? If so....VERY impressive. I do find the pattern within the bokeh as seen in #1 & #4 to be quite different. I've not experienced that effect.
J. Pow wrote:
Thanks Dan for the insight to the lens. I will mess with the MF while auto focusing. I just dont know the lens yet and wanted feedback. I thought the pics looked really different from anything I have ever done. Really an interesting lens and I think some really cool stuff will come out of it. Thanks again.
Joel
It is a fine lens Joel. I have hand tremors and the "IS" sure helps! My Canon EF180mm f3.5 Macro is my "go to Macro lens" but without the "IS" feature I am loosing 8 out of 10 images due to shake. Initially there were no tremors but as I age the tremors become more pronounced and constant.
Need to find a great "IS" macro lens at 180mm or greater.
Dan
LarryBeemer wrote:
I use the RF 100 macro lens quite a bit on an ancient Canon R5. It's the only RF lens I own (for now). My subjects are mostly product type images and the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod and always manual focus. I have been very satisfied with the performance of this lens. I WAS using the ef 100 f2.8 lens. no L, no IS, no USM...quite ancient....so this was a huge "upgrade" for me.
Your images are all quite nice. Are they handheld? If so....VERY impressive. I do find the pattern within the bokeh as seen in #1 & #4 to be quite different. I've not experienced that effect.
LarryBeemer wrote:
I use the RF 100 macro lens quite a bit on an ancient Canon R5. It's the only RF lens I own (for now). My subjects are mostly product type images and the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod and always manual focus. I have been very satisfied with the performance of this lens. I WAS using the ef 100 f2.8 lens. no L, no IS, no USM...quite ancient....so this was a huge "upgrade" for me.
Your images are all quite nice. Are they handheld? If so....VERY impressive. I do find the pattern within the bokeh as seen in #1 & #4 to be quite different. I've not experienced that effect.
Thank you Larry, yes they are all hand held however I do have the IS and it was turned on. Yeah, the bokeh was weird so just wondering if everyone else had those results. Im going to shoot a lot more with it and mess with it. Thanks for the feedback
J. Pow wrote:
Thank you Larry, yes they are all hand held however I do have the IS and it was turned on. Yeah, the bokeh was weird so just wondering if everyone else had those results. Im going to shoot a lot more with it and mess with it. Thanks for the feedback
Joel
I have noticed the "different" bokeh on a few images posted here that were from the R1. I don't recall the specific exposure data though, which could be a contributing factor.
Again...hats off for the mastery of the handheld exposure.
Danpbphoto wrote:
I won't intrude any further here. These are from about an hour ago..100mm f2.8Macro and Canon 5DsR. Probably 100ft away..100% AF
Dan
Those are fantastic. I think I'm going to mess with the MF with the AF like you said. I really like the "different" bokeh. Like you guys said, I think it's operating fantastic. I just didn't expect that result. . Again, thanks for the feedback, I very much appreciate it.
LarryBeemer wrote:
I have noticed the "different" bokeh on a few images posted here that were from the R1. I don't recall the specific exposure data though, which could be a contributing factor.
Again...hats off for the mastery of the handheld exposure.
J. Pow wrote:
Those are fantastic. I think I'm going to mess with the MF with the AF like you said. I really like the "different" bokeh. Like you guys said, I think it's operating fantastic. I just didn't expect that result. . Again, thanks for the feedback, I very much appreciate it.
Joel
Joel, I went to a Fuji MF body, 100s ii, in the Spring. The "learning curve" for this camera is huge for me. All sorts of "issues" and they have been all my ignorance...Let's say my "adaptability" to a new MF system.
I believe you will find the 100mmf2.8Macro IS a winner. Yes I would like better bokeh at that focal length but it is no slouch!
You have any further questions, need some images at certain focal lengths....just ask..
Dan
Danpbphoto wrote:
Joel, I went to a Fuji MF body, 100s ii, in the Spring. The "learning curve" for this camera is huge for me. All sorts of "issues" and they have been all my ignorance...Let's say my "adaptability" to a new MF system.
I believe you will find the 100mmf2.8Macro IS a winner. Yes I would like better bokeh at that focal length but it is no slouch!
You have any further questions, need some images at certain focal lengths....just ask..
Dan
C & C welcome as I wish to shoot better with it. It's tricky to get the focal length and focus area right as I was all over the place.
Thanks for looking,
Joel
I had to look up "RF" as that tells me the sensor size, necessary for focal length comments. I use mostly m4/3 so I can more easily relate to what you are doing than if you were using full frame (which I also use).
I took a look at your website and love your images, especially the colours.
The problem here is that you have posted crops and seem to be asking about shooting macro. If you use a teleconverter (extender in Canonese) or crop an image the result will have an increase in effective DOF. I suggest that you shoot details separately so you can see the final DOF in the viewfinder. For macro my normal aperture is f11, occasionally f8. Thse are what I set on the lens. At increasing magnification the effective apertures will be increased.
e6filmuser wrote:
I had to look up "RF" as that tells me the sensor size, necessary for focal length comments. I use mostly m4/3 so I can more easily relate to what you are doing than if you were using full frame (which I also use).
I took a look at your website and love your images, especially the colours.
The problem here is that you have posted crops and seem to be asking about shooting macro. If you use a teleconverter (extender in Canonese) or crop an image the result will have an increase in effective DOF. I suggest that you shoot details separately so you can see the final DOF in the viewfinder. For macro my normal aperture is f11, occasionally f8. Thse are what I set on the lens. At increasing magnification the effective apertures will be increased.
Thank you Harold. I have since been working on a larger aperture. I guess when I initially took photos with it I didn't realize how big of a difference that made. I was speaking in general terms because I was shooting it the way I normally shoot. This was my first time shooting the lens so I was learning on the fly. These initial attempts I struggled with and looked "weird" because I just didn't know how to use the lens.
I do find the pattern within the bokeh as seen in #1 & #4 to be quite different. I've not experienced that effect.
. Again, thanks for the feedback, I very much appreciate it.