Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Showing 1-10 of 17
Canon EF 100MM f/2.8 Macro USM Lens - No "IS"
KEN TELLS ALL "PERFECTIONIST", Amazon
1 July 2012
Summary: Have had this lens about 4 days. I have extensively tested it out. This is a well made lens with a nice feel to it. It has a wonderful review on Photozone and by reviewers on Amazon. It takes excellent pictures on both crop & full frame camera bodies. However I found close focusing, macro photography, literally impossible unless a tripod was used. A monopod improved focusing but it was still not tack sharp.
Summary: In terms of clarity and color, I'd give this lens 5 Stars. But for my use, I only give it 3 Stars. I purchased this lens because I love macro photography and I wanted a lens that would let me get closer than my Canon 28-135mm lens. And the 100mm macro lens sure does that. But what I don't like is how susceptible it is to hand shake. BUT, I do have a slight tremor in my hands, so this makes the lens more of a problem for me than it would be for most people.
Summary: purchased this lens mainly for close ups for wedding ring shots.. images look really nice, however this thing hunts on auto focus like none other in low light. background blends quite well when used wide open but you will want to manual focus whenever you use this lens, and don't even try to use it on a moving target..
Summary: I bought this lens primary to shoot pictures of my jewelry. The image quality is really excellent, but I was disappointed with other features so I returned the lens. The main disadvantage is that the lens is VERY heavy! The second inconvenience is that the minimum focus distance is so long! It's difficult to hold in your left hand a diamond jewelry or loose diamond and at the same time to shoot with the HEAVY camera hold by the other hand!
Pros: Great picture quality.
Cons: Very heavy lens. Long minimum focus distance.
Summary: Oh how I wish I could write as glowing reviews as everyone else. Yes, it is sharp. I notice using macro it is sharp but up to around F16, strangely, as the aperture goes smaller it gets less sharp. As in if I shoot at F22 it is very soft. Yes, I've tried experimenting using different Fstops shooting the same subject (jewelry) and repeatedly found the same results. So I thought maybe it has something to do with the camera.
Pros: Sharp middle to wide open., Pretty solid build.
Cons: Very soft when aperture is closed down. F22 shots not sharp at all., Very dark, about 1 1/2 stops darker than other Canon lenses.
Summary: I bought this lens for macro wedding shots, but hoped the 2.8 would come in handy for dark receptions as well. I was very disappointed. I have missed many important moments in broad daylight and in dark receptions because the autofocus is SO slow! I still use this lens for macro shots and portraits, but I can't rely on it at weddings. My next purchase will be a prime 1.4 or 1.8 lens to replace this one entirely.
Summary: As a busy wedding photographer, I use this lens to get another view of the world. It slows me down to make me look at things differently. I live in the Florida Keys so I am surrounded by nature - irridescent fish scales, blue bugs in hot pink flowers, almost extinct snails, and bubbles within bubbles on the beach - just a few of my new favorite things after getting this macro lens.
High Class, but in this range, not necessarily the best available
Steve Tracy, B&H Photo
2 July 2007
Summary: Having been a user of various Macro/Micro lenses over many years as a Professional, I can fairly state that although this still does rank among the best available in the 50-100mm range, I feel that it is no longer the best option available to Canon Macro enthusiasts. This is coming from someone who covets an extensive range of incomparable Canon L series lenses!