musclepics wrote:
You have already have a 100/2.8 AND 135L and still want a 100L?
You have a serious problem, and I mean that.
Contrary me, I actually SOLD my 100 F2.8 to help fund the 100L. Plan was to sell the 135 also, but........still on the fence.
I DO think that the 100L can take the place of both lenses for ME, that was the main goal in purchasing it. The IS is very nice, and it does focus almost as quickly as the 135, except in macro situations where focusing is a bit more contrary.
Peter, you gotta give people who own the 100L and 100/2.8 and 180L some extra credibility. If they tell you the 100L is worth buying .... then it's worth buying!
BTW I am still wondering why anyone would use the 100L for BIF. I have a 200L and all my friends think it's a joke for BIF unless I am shooting big birds.
akilah wrote:
I have the 100L, and it is worth it (to my wife and I anyway). We also have the old 100 and the 180L. IS is worth it for handheld macro -- it easily adds two stops of advantage. I think handheld macro is a non-starter without it. On a full frame, the 180 provides extra reach, which is an advantage, but again you really want a tripod.
A solution to your problem show your wife some of the pictures of the monstorous collections out there and she might have a little sympathy for you, furthermore show her how the value of lens tend to be stable so you do not lose much if you ever resell(especially compared to the depreciation of a car). Furthermore play on the fact that having more camera lens will keep you out of trouble as we are too busy fiddling with our gears. Lastly take your wife on a fashion shoot, buy her a new wardrobe, pour her some wine and shoot nothing but her and tell her how lovely she is. ...Show more →
Robert, all I can say is that having you as a lens purchase consultant, poor old Yakim is surely doomed now. His wife will do him in sooner than later.
bobbytan wrote:
Peter, you gotta give people who own the 100L and 100/2.8 and 180L some extra credibility. If they tell you the 100L is worth buying .... then it's worth buying!
BTW I am still wondering why anyone would use the 100L for BIF. I have a 200L and all my friends think it's a joke for BIF unless I am shooting big birds.
Yes, I hear ya, Bobby.
When one manages to get close to them birds, the lenses like 400 and 500 become totally useless for BIF photography. Now you are in the application domain of 100-200 mm lenses.
My old 100 f/2.8 USM has captured some very fast/explosive BIF action.
Do you live in a tree house or something? You are the only person I know who shoots BIF (incredibly successfully I might add!) with a 100 macro lens!
Seriously, the Hybrid IS, UD glass, exceptional color (better than the original version and comparable to the Voigtlander APO Lanthar) and faster AF are all significant advantages over the older version. Let me put this way - I do think your keeper rate will increase by at least 20% with the 100L. I have always thought the 100/2.8 is an incredible lens. Well, the 100L is even better.
PetKal wrote:
Yes, I hear ya, Bobby.
When one manages to get close to them birds, the lenses like 400 and 500 become totally useless for BIF photography. Now you are in the application domain of 100-200 mm lenses.
My old 100 f/2.8 USM has captured some very fast/explosive BIF action.
bobbytan wrote:
Do you live in a tree house or something? You are the only person I know who shoots BIF (incredibly successfully I might add!) with a 100 macro lens!...
Didn't you know that Peter is "the bird whisperer"?
I sold my 70-200 F4 IS as I found I just wasn't using it.
Once sold I bought the 100L and I really like it. Macro aside, it's a very, very sharp lens.
I'm amazed at the 100% crops and it's already becoming a good all-around outdoor lens. It's really the sharpest lens I have ever seen/used but I'm not a worldly source on these things!
The macro thing is something I've always wanted to look into and now I have the tool for the job.
I'm impressed. I've already shot more with this in a week than 9 months of my 70-200.
Sharpness and great color aside, this is such a FUN lens to shoot with, isn't it?
EyeBrock wrote:
I sold my 70-200 F4 IS as I found I just wasn't using it.
Once sold I bought the 100L and I really like it. Macro aside, it's a very, very sharp lens.
I'm amazed at the 100% crops and it's already becoming a good all-around outdoor lens. It's really the sharpest lens I have ever seen/used but I'm not a worldly source on these things!
The macro thing is something I've always wanted to look into and now I have the tool for the job.
I'm impressed. I've already shot more with this in a week than 9 months of my 70-200....Show more →
Peter,
Having both the 100mm macro lenses doesn't make much sense, although who says you have to do things that make sense . I would seriously suggest for you to buy that new L lens. After using both for awhile you can decide which one to keep. I just got mine the other day but I will be selling my 180mm macro, which I used for shy critters but seldom in macro range (1:1) but more for closeup. However, lately I have been using more a longish lens, like a 300mm IS lens, with an extension tube and again, the IS helps in that case.
For me, in addition to macro, I would like to use that lens is for portraits. That's where the IS comes in handy and it is definitely another reason for me to get that lens. People question the usefullness of IS for macro purposes and I care less what they think. I do believe that it does help in cases where you don't have any tripod available or when macro opportunities come up and it just happens you don't bring a tripod with you. But for planned and deliberate macro photography, I will always use my tripod for macro regardless of the IS.
Live is short; what are you going to do with all the money you save anyway ? Enjoy it!
AGeoJO wrote:
keep. I just got mine the other day but I will be selling my 180mm macro, which I used for shy critters but seldom in macro range (1:1) but more for closeup.
Sell 180L ?
But...but....that's one of my best Grackle lenses.
PetKal wrote:
Sell 180L ?
But...but....that's one of my best Grackle lenses.
Have you tried the 200mm f/2.0L with an extension tube to do the same? You may like that setup even better... On the other hand, that's what I am thinking of doing but you can keep the 180mm lens, too, Nobody is saying that you have too many lenses. I certainly won't.... .
I think that the IS will improve the sharpness of many users images. With the newer caneras having very small photosites, even a small amount of movement drops the resulting resolution quite a bit.
However, if you are a careful photographer and use a tripod correctly, you will continue to get better images than a handheld 100L.
I've spoken at length about my experience with the EF 100/2.8L macro IS. In short, it's a great lens, with excellent performance under virtually all shooting conditions.
However, I have never used the 100/2, the 100/2.8 macro, or the 135/2L, so it's not possible for me to establish a comparative assessment. I can go off the test charts and tell you that among all the lenses mentioned, the 135/2L is the sharpest. But this should come as no surprise, since it has the L build, an f/2 max aperture, and does not have macro capability.
Sharpness, though, is hardly the last word when it comes to choosing lenses. For bird photography, the 300/4L IS is an excellent choice for excellent image quality, long reach, IS, and relatively close MFD, all in a reasonably lightweight design. If you need a shorter focal length with no compromises, the 200/2L IS cannot be beat. Going even shorter, the 135/2L is next, although at this point one should seriously consider the 70-200mm family of zooms, attached to a second body.
The 100/2.8L macro IS, I have found, is really meant to be used in two general situations: (1) 1:1 - 1:3x stopped down to around f/5.6-13 where the lens performs best, or (2) portraiture from f/2.8 - f/5.6. I'm not really sure how well it works as a birding lens, although I have had considerable success using this lens to take photos of hummingbirds because they are so small.
Nice shots, Bobby! But in my recollection, the brown pelicans are not that greenish yellow, especially on the second shot... . It looks like you are enjoying the 7D now as your birding camera. Keep it up!
Excellent shots, Bobby, particularly the little egret. You seem to have found your fave birding/ BIF lens.
I just can not help but notice that a skilled photographer, even if his main line is fashion and glamour, perhaps instinctively does good composition/framing in whatever other photography type they might try their hand on.
.