 |
|
|
Dan Doucette
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 2, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 27
|
|
Review Date: Jan 18, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, good contrast, lightweight, affordable, fun to use.
|
|
Cons:
|
Unusual/poor bokeh characteristics at times (see below), relatively short camera to subject distances (but unavoidable without longer lens). Build quality is just acceptable (but don't forget the reasonable price of this lens).
|
|
Overall this is a great macro lens at a reasonably affordable price. It has great sharpness, very nice contrast, and is relatively easy to get good results with, (provided you use good macro shooting technique). The lens is light enough to be carried often, in anticipation of those times when you will find a use for its macro capabilities. The build quality is acceptable, especially for the price, but is certainly not "L" construction.
I use this lens only for macro shooting, so I can not comment on its capabilities and handling in conventional shooting situations.
The only main problem I ever find with this lens is unusual out of focus highlight points. Sometimes when grains of sand, dew drops, rain drops, snow/frost flakes, etc. are out of focus in the background, the spectrum of light breaks down and you can see each color that makes white light, as if the light were passing through a prisme. It's odd, and showns itself to lesser or greater extents depending on the strength of the highlight point. Larger areas of bright background highlight do not show this characteristic, just smaller points of light. Also, the overall quality of the out of focus background bokeh is sometimes a bit harsh, and not as smooth as I would like. This only becomes apparent under some shooting situations (see salamander photo in gallery at the link below).
Overall I am very satisified with this lens and often get good images while using it. I highly recommenrd it, especially considering the good price.
To see images taken with this lens, visit my website: http://www.infotography.com/nature/index.php?album=close-up&image=001+close+up.jpg All images in this gallery were taken with the 100mm macro.
-Dan
|
|
 Jan 18, 2007
|
|
tidelands
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 23, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 77
|
|
Review Date: Jan 13, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Couldn't be sharper. Or realistically sturdier. Does what it's supposed to do with no back talk.
|
|
Cons:
|
No complaints. Particularly compared to the 50mm macro, this is an easy piece of glass to work with.
|
|
|
For the money this is a wonderful lens. This is not to say that more money would buy a lens that would provide better results or make the job easier. I bought it new from B&H and would have been happy to pay more had I needed to. I have it on a 30D and have shot maybe 1000 product close ups since its arrival. With the proper setup there is little to do post production. Clarity is great and the handling is very smooth. This thing walks all over the 50mm macro. I've generally been shooting at f5.6 with the lighting I have and that offers a pretty shallow DoF. I don't know what that means for portraits as I haven't tried yet. But for the work it has done so far, which is what it is designed for, it gets a 10.
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2007
|
|
DLai
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1130
|
|
Review Date: Jan 11, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $469.95
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, comfortable focus ring, and sharpness.
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow af (but what else would you expect from a macro lens).
|
|
|
Although the 100mm macro is one of the least used lenses in my bag, it's still quite a performer when I need deliver a high quality image.
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2007
|
|
John Abbey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 6, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 6, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
This lens is very sharp and produces nice colors. It is also a good focal length on a 20D for macro work. Decent build.
|
|
Cons:
|
The build could be better. Focusing is slow (but should be expected as it is a macro lens).
|
|
This lens is a very good value and it produces great results. I find this lens to be very sharp even wide open at 2.8. The lens is built well, but could be better. I guess I am just used to L lenses. For the price it is built very well and is one of my favorite lenses to use.
If you want to see some examples I have shot with this lens visit my site:
http://www.johnsfilm.com/html/macro_photography.html
|
|
|
Jan 6, 2007
|
|
Jan Waumans
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 16, 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 53
|
|
Review Date: Dec 27, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, good distance to object, size does not change when focusing
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight and size, possible addiction to good lenses
|
|
|
I bought this lens second hand (with hood & UV filter) for my new 400D since I wanted a real macro lens all my life
The lens behaves exactly as described in the reviews: it is very sharp and the autofocus is effective for macro subjects when helped in the range by hand
I would not buy it for portraits or landscape because of the slow autofocus, but if I have to choose between this lens and my old 75-300 1:4-5.6 II (120g less weight, same length) I will take the macro on a hike
Chances are 2x crops from this lens stay competitive with the zoom, not to mention distortion, CA, contrast and resistance to flare
I am pleased with my purchase
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2006
|
|
jirok12944
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 22, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 22, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
solid build, exceptional results (sharpness, colors, contrast), price
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I've used it for half a year on full-frame sensor. Excellent everything!!!
The only issue I have is 100mm is not very usable focal length for what I do (people, portrait, advertising)... but it is exceptional lens which exceeds expectation and easily can have red ring on it. Macro 1:1 is nice addition.
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006
|
|
Ardepp
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 30, 2006
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredible sharp wide open. Also excellent portrait and short telephoto lens. Inner focusing.
|
|
Cons:
|
Focusing ring is little loose.
|
|
|
When I compare this gem to my other lenses (EF 24mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.8 and EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM) this one is the sharpest. If you want really good macro/portrait/telephoto lens for FF camera then get this! It covers pretty large scale of things what you can do with it.
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2006
|
|
Ryan Allen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 22, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 22, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
super sharp, great contrast, solid build, range delimiter
|
|
Cons:
|
focus ring prone to get junk inside, hunts in low light, not as fast focus as I'd hoped
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2006
|
|
mbohunsky
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Dec 30, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3668
|
|
Review Date: Oct 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Absolutely stunningly sharp, amazing contrast, very quick to focus with limiter set, well dampened focus ring
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I could not ask for more from a macro lens. This lens is sharper wide open than most other primes stopped down. I honestly do not see any improvement in stopping this lens down other than achieving more depth-of-field. Having owned a number of L lenses in the past, this lens is in the same class minus the price and maybe the build quality. That is not to say that the build quality is not good.
I do not see the need for an image stabilizer on a macro lens. A good flash will give you the ability to shoot at any aperture and a hand-holdable shutter speed.
This lens is a keeper. I can't imagine why I would ever let this go other than if Canon came out with a longer version with the same optics and price. This lens could easily cost twice as much and the price would still be worth it.
|
|
|
Oct 11, 2006
|
|
AbbieCat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Oct 10, 2006
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Love this lense, very sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
No complaints here.
|
|
|
I do have a question. Will the purchase of the Canon extension tufe EF25 II add any benefit to this lense? Will it increase the magnification or decrease the focusing distance? I am new to digital photography. Thanks
|
|
|
Oct 10, 2006
|
|
AbbieCat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Oct 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This is not a review, new to this site and digital photography. I have the Canon 100mm macro lense and love. I am wondering would there be a benefit to purchasing the canon EF II extension tube. If there is a benefit, what would they be? Would it increase the magnification? Would it decrease the focusing distance? Any information would be appreciated. Thanks
|
|
Cons:
|
None that I can see
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 10, 2006
|
|
garay002
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 5, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 344
|
|
Review Date: Oct 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $420.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Excellent build quality, 2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
sometimes hunts in low light.
|
|
|
Excellent lens. This is my first Macro lens, its the sharpest lens in my bag.
Also works as a very good portrait lens in my opinion.
|
|
|
Oct 9, 2006
|
|
DoubleD
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 26, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 195
|
|
Review Date: Oct 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp at 2.8, well built, razor thin depth of field, can be used as as short telephoto in lowish light.
|
|
Cons:
|
No tripod collar included, no IS, AF hunts in low light, best used on tripod for macro.
|
|
Here is a great lens, it is sharp at 2.8 and gets sharper stopped down which is normally done when using the lens for macro work. Talking of which, it is best used on a tripod (shame no tripod collar included). See a photo of mine taken at 1:1 :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidprior/243891665/
As a short telephoto it is great at 2.8 when the depth of field is not so critical.
I would have given it a 10 if it had Image Stabilisation (like Nikon 105mm VR)
|
|
|
Oct 8, 2006
|
|
walter23
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 30, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 2692
|
|
Review Date: Sep 7, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $469.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Built like an L lens (same materials and quality), sharp as hell, internal focus, 1:1 magnification, focus limiter switch for fast telephoto use. Amazing background blur for portraits. Please note that I don't own any other fast telephoto lenses to compare to, but it's L quality "bokeh" for sure).
|
|
Cons:
|
AF hunts a bit especially in lower light or with low contrast subjects (both macro and non-macro, though this is a non-issue for macro since I manually focus). I think this is just because the focus mechanism travels much further than on a regular lens, so that hunting is more noticable.
No hood included! Cheapo canon! Bah! It's a piece of plastic, you could give it away and still make money.
|
|
I ordered this to canada from B&H as the canadian price is $699 and all told it came out to around $530 cross borders including tax and currency conversion.
This is a fantastic macro lens and I don't regret buying it. The lens is very high quality and stands on its own as a great fast telephoto without the macro capability, but macro is what it's built for and macro is where it shines. High overall lens quality aside, macrophotography opened up a whole universe I scarcely believed possible before. Now even the most boring yard or manicured park contains millions of photographic opportunities.
The working distance with this lens is quite nice - insects move fast and can be skittish, so it's nice not to have to get too close (challenging enough anyway). AF is a mixed bag with this lens - though I'd say it's very good for a macro lens. It hunts a bit, and it's not quite as fast as something like a 70-200 f/4L, but it's still fairly fast and good. For macro use, manual focus isn't too hard with the tiny DOF at f/2.8. It's abundantly clear where your focus sits 
It should have come with a hood (and hey, a case too). It is L quality in all respects except for not including a hood in the package. Hoods are just cheap plastic and felt. I know business empires aren't built on kindness, but c'mon Canon. A hood should be standard. I would have given it a 10 overall and for price except for this.
|
|
|
Sep 7, 2006
|
|
cathpah
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 769
|
|
Review Date: Sep 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
size, build, sharpness, and price
|
|
Cons:
|
none.
|
|
|
one heck of a deal at its price. sharp as sharp can be and it can be a great portrait lens as well. haven't really heard much about non-sharp copies either.
great lens that makes you think/look at the shot a whole lot differently
|
|
|
Sep 3, 2006
|
|
my58vw
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 174
|
|
Review Date: Jul 16, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Weight, Size, Sharpness wide open, Build is L quality, 1:1 macro
|
|
Cons:
|
Hood is a little long, DOF at f/2.8 even for normal subjects is very thin
|
|
|
I bought this lens as both a macro and a portrait lens for my 1Ds while I wait for the 85 f/1.2L. The camera states that it can be used for both applications and in most cases it is right. For normal subjects the DOF for f/2.8 is quite thin compared to the 24-70, 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.4 at f/2.8 which can make focusing a challenge. Wide open is quite sharp, but usually needs a little USM in photoshop, very sharp from f/4.0 on.
Even on a FF camera 100mm is a bit long, and not the best for walk around, but excels at head and shoulder shots, and flower/insect macro work. In short this lens is nearly L quality, but not quite at the larger apertures, but for half the cost of the L macro it is very good. I can see why so many people say this is a great lens... and will be in my kit for a long time (until I get the 180mm f/3.5L Macro that is).
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
210
|
528454
|
Feb 13, 2018
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
95% of reviewers
|
$480.04
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.10
|
9.21
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
