Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 23, 2012, 20:22

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors


« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print

Topic: Canon 100mm 2.8 macro vs. 100mm 2.8 L macro IS  

(Read 3657 times)
kjorgen



« on: March 09, 2010, 18:40 »

I am buying one of these, but I'm a little bit unsure if it's really worth the extra money to get the L version with IS ? Has anyone compared these two? I don't have to much money to spend, but I don't want to buy the cheapest one if the other one is much much better  Smiley


Ignore | Logged


DepositPhotos.com
Zeus


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2010, 18:51 »

Both rate very highly for quality of image. Seems to be whether you would find IS useful or not. I have the non IS version and find it a fine lens. I would however like IS for the quick hand held images.


Ignore | Logged


kjorgen



« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2010, 19:03 »

I'm gonna use it underwater as well... And it's a bit hard using a tripod down there (  Wink ), so maybe it will get easier getting a sharp picture with IS?! Havn't actually tried IS underwater yet Wink


Ignore | Logged


Dan_Wiedemann

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2010, 19:06 »

Hey..

I own a 100mm f2.8 macro and love it! It's the lenses I use the most.

I just bought a 70-200mm 2.8 L IS USM and I'm loving it too.. The L really is better so depends on the quality you want, but I am never disappointed by my non-L 100mm F2.8 macro! =D

Good luck!


Ignore | Logged


Zeus


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2010, 19:11 »

I'm gonna use it underwater as well... And it's a bit hard using a tripod down there (  Wink ), so maybe it will get easier getting a sharp picture with IS?! Havn't actually tried IS underwater yet Wink

The IS is a big help getting a crisp image when it's you that is moving but not if it's the subject moving. But like you say tripods are hard to set up at depth so you will diminish some of the problems with IS. But if you are exposing mostly with fast flash at close ranges, IS may not be of much use. Your best friend will be the quick flash speeds and high sync speeds.


Ignore | Logged


madelaide
« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2010, 19:15 »

I have the IS version, but I can not say about the non-IS one.  There is some gain with IS in macros shot handheld, but I believe the swaying from being underwater can not be compensated at all with IS.  I opted for the IS version because it can be handy in situations where I won't be carrying a tripod, plus it's also a newer product.  In tests at SLRGear, I think, there was a slight higher CA in the IS version, though.

I took some sample shots, but haven't downloaded them yet.  I placed some at SP for demonstration:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/cameras-lenses/new-toys-have-arrived/


Ignore | Logged


Susan S.

iStock Gauge
« Reply #6 on: March 09, 2010, 21:17 »

I have the non-IS version and it's an excellent lens. For the sort of macro and close up work and occasional use for portraits I do its about the only lens I have that I don't regret the absence of IS - it's almost always used by me either with studio lighting/macro flash or with available light on a tripod. I guess if you did bug chasing with it which is more hand held or available light portraiture it would be nice to have the IS. But the image quality on either should be excellent.


Ignore | Logged


kjorgen



« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2010, 03:15 »

Thank you all for great advice Smiley It's interesting to hear that it isn't much difference in the sharpness...you would think it was when it's L!


Ignore | Logged


Perry



« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2010, 05:45 »

I did an update from the old version to the new and I think it was definitely worth it.
The difference in image quality isn't that great, but the IS is.
With the old non-IS one I would struggle to get sharp images at 1/125 seconds, with IS I get good results at 1/15 seconds, that's three stops longer shutter speed. With good luck I have managed to get sharp results at 1/8 seconds.
Remember that IS doesn't stop moving objects/people so it's not a solution for every problem. Remember also that IS doesn't work very well att macro/closeup distances.

While the image quality difference isn't great, I still notice more "punch" in colors and better performance at large apertures (larger than 4)


Ignore | Logged


Whiz

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2010, 10:09 »

I've owned both too. The image quality is about the same in my opinion (maybe ever so slightly better), and the IS works well. I only bought it because I was curious about the IS. The weight is good, and the lens does not feel cheap. But you should probably turn off the IS when you're shooting studio work on a tripod because sometimes the images turn out blurry with it on. If you're shooting flowers or something outdoors via your hands, then the IS can really help you out. I took this hand held: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-11203590-gaillardia-flower.php


Ignore | Logged


Zeus


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2010, 11:33 »

Thank you all for great advice Smiley It's interesting to hear that it isn't much difference in the sharpness...you would think it was when it's L!

From what I've read the L maybe slightly less sharp at wide open. Probably a function of the IS.


Ignore | Logged


PixelBitch



« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2010, 12:51 »

Try the Zeiss ZE 100 f2 Makro...more expensive but the Zeiss optics leave Canon for dead


Ignore | Logged


Perry



« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2010, 13:28 »

Try the Zeiss ZE 100 f2 Makro...more expensive but the Zeiss optics leave Canon for dead

Maybe so, but it doesn't have IS. And if you don't need IS (or macro) Canon's 135/2 is also a great piece of glass.


Ignore | Logged


Xalanx


« Reply #13 on: March 10, 2010, 18:37 »

Try the Zeiss ZE 100 f2 Makro...more expensive but the Zeiss optics leave Canon for dead

Yea and you also need to manual focus like everything from Zeiss made for Canon Tongue


Ignore | Logged


Microstock InsiderEnvateo Photo Tools
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Canon EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Software - General
ichiro17 11 1951 Last post March 27, 2007, 12:17
by ichiro17
Canon 100mm Macro!
Cameras / Lenses
DanP68 19 3320 Last post January 12, 2008, 17:59
by Gregor909
Canon 100mm F2.8 macro
Cameras / Lenses
Lior 10 2497 Last post May 20, 2008, 10:20
by Alatriste
Canon 100mm f/2.8 vs Canon 180mm f/3.5 vs Sigma 150mm f/2.8
Cameras / Lenses
leaf 15 10572 Last post May 20, 2008, 08:17
by RASimon
Cheap macro extension tubes for Canon
Canon
travismanley 0 941 Last post February 18, 2009, 17:24
by travismanley

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc