According provided by Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM many thanks to the official Canon representative in Ukraine.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM review
The Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM is a pretty macro lens that belongs to Canon's L-series lenses, so you should expect both good image quality and good workmanship from it. This is the first Canon macro lens to feature image stabilization and, for the first time in any Canon lens, features a new IS system to compensate for various types of shake. The gimbal really works well, especially in the infinity to 0.5m range.
Canon has several 100 / 2.8 class macro lenses:
- Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8, 1990
- Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 USM, 2000 release
- Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM, 2009
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM is the only Canon macro lens with stabilizer. Due to the fact that generally macro lenses suffer from strong 'Focus breathing', the effectiveness of the stabilization system at distances close to the MDF decreases, but still, the stabilizer helps a lot :)
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM
As befits an objective of this class, its body has dust and moisture protection, is made mainly of plastic, weighs 625 grams (without a hood and a bayonet cap) and uses filters with a diameter of 67 mm.
You can buy a tripod foot to the lens, which is mounted in a narrow place of its body, closer to the camera mount. Unfortunately, the Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM without such a foot came to my review. When the hood is in the transport position, it completely blocks access to the focus ring, and in the normal position, the lens hood gives the lens 120 points to a solid look :).
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM
The Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM has a focus stop that can be adjusted in three positions: Full, 0.5m-∞ and 0.3m-0.5m. If in Full mode the lens still misses and begins to focus from MDF to infinity, then it takes him enough time to feel discomfort from the 'speed' of this process, especially when photographing people. If you use the limiter, the focusing becomes very fast.
My copy of the Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM when used on Canon 5D and Canon 700D (across JVI), well 'caught' focusing, there were very few misses. Most of the misses occurred when working in macro mode. I was pleased with the focusing consistency.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM
During focusing, the front and rear lenses remain motionless, which is very good. The focus ring is rubberized and rotates 120 degrees (without a hard stop at infinity). During auto focus, the ring remains stationary. When extreme positions are reached, the ring continues to rotate freely without affecting focus. The lens has a scale with marks on the focus distance and magnification. MDF is 30 cm, while you can get pictures with an increase of 1 to 1.
With the closest focusing, the distance from the front lens to the subject is approximately 13 cm (measured with a ruler), which is sometimes very small when shooting various animals and insects that, when they see the front lens of the lens or its hood, can decide to leave the shooting area. For this reason, professional photographers recommend using macro lenses with the largest focal length possible in order to increase the shooting distance between the 'model' and the lens, such as the Canon EF 180mm 1: 3.5L Macro.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM Switches
In addition, Canon's continuous manual focus control is supported. FTM (Full Time Manual Focusing). Working with the lens is quite pleasant. The aperture consists of 9 blades and closes to F / 32.
Although, not everything is so rosy. FTM mode is only available when using the 'One shot' and 'AI Focus' focus methods. Also, FTM is available in Live View (including when shooting video) with any focus method selected. When using the 'AI Servo' method, the FTM mode does not work. For example, Nikon lenses that have a similar feature called M / A (manual focus priority), turn off the automatic focus when you touch the focus ring with any focus method selected on the camera. I often shoot in the AI Servo tracking mode and in rare situations, the lack of the FTM mode, and even on a professional-grade lens, annoying at least. Maybe i just misunderstand FTM working principle, for many Users claim that you can rotate the focusing ring at any time with any setting. You can rotate it, but in the 'AI Servo' mode you have to 'fight' with the camera for control over the field of focus. Add to this the fact that when shooting macro, autofocus is sometimes 'lost' and cannot accurately focus on the subject that the photographer has chosen.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM
It is not necessary to think that a macro lens is used exclusively for shooting small objects, it can be perfectly used for a huge number of other purposes, for example, for the same portrait photography. A good fix is always useful in the photographer's case :)
Optical design of Canon EF100mm f / 2.8L Macro IS USM. 15 elements in 12 groups
If you need a macro lens for subject shooting of stationary products with a tripod, then instead of Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM, you can purchase the previous version - Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 USM without noticeable deterioration in image quality, and at the same time saving half budget.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM with step hood
I can not say anything bad about image quality :).
Personally, I liked the nice bokeh of the lens, examples of bokeh can be seen in the photos below. Among the shortcomings, vignetting at F / 2.8 can be noted. At the same time, the lens copes well with backlight, giving a sharp and contrasting image. Most of the shortcomings are easily fixed by the camera processor or post-processing.
Here link to the archive with the originals - 402 MB, 28 photos in .CR2 format (RAW) from the camera Canon 5D и Canon 700D. You can find more examples of photos in Canon EOS 700D review и Canon 1200D. On Canon APS-C cameras EGF lens is 160 mm, on APS-H - 130 mm.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM with hood in transport mode
Also, the Canon EF 100mm 1: 2.8L Macro IS USM can work well as a portrait lens, although, with some caveats, I already mentioned one of them in my video review... Personally, I'm not afraid of the oversharpness that is attributed to macro lenses when used to photograph people. In practice, oversharpness is more of a myth than a real problem. But a certain 'stiffness' in the photo taken with macro lenses, after all, can be striking.
Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar 1: 2,8 f = 100mm T * and Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM
Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link, or in the price block below:
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM and Sigma 180mm 1: 3.5 APO Macro DG HSM D EX
L-series lenses can be tough as they are considered the best in their class. You can find fault with Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM that something loosens a little during transportation (most likely elements of the stabilization system), this reduces the level of confidence in the product. Also, the plastic body is much worse to the touch than the all-metal one, for example, in good old manual lenses such as Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar 1: 2,8 f = 100mm T *.
Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM on Camera Canon EOS 5D
Many macro lenses focusing from infinity to MDF show an increase in the number F. This behavior does not apply to the Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM, you can shoot at F / 2.8 at any focusing distance. However, when focusing, the real aperture the lens falls. I conducted an experiment: I aimed the lens at a homogeneous surface, when focusing on infinity, the camera showed values exposure ISO 3200, 1/4000, F / 2.8, when refocusing on MDF, the indicators became equal to ISO 3200, 1/1000, F / 2.8, as a result, I got a decrease in aperture by 2 stops (4 times). Anyway, if you look closely at the aperture blades during focusing, you will notice that when you turn the focus ring toward the MDF, the aperture blades close.
Macro photography is difficult. Even with a dedicated lens like this, it can be difficult to get a good shot at times. A lot of users often catch the idea of macro photography, but as it comes down to it, there are many frustrations when faced with a number of difficulties. First of all, difficulties are associated with a small depth of field and a constant lack of light when shooting with a closed aperture. If you want to spend money on a professional macro lens, but you have no experience in macro photography at all - first try what 'macro' is and what it is eaten with, using macro rings with any existing lens, even with a regular one Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS STM.
Results
The Canon Macro Lens EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM is a very good professional-grade lens. It has few flaws, creates a high quality image.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Is it macro in the pictures?
And what, a pencil lead, a match head, a microcircuit and (apparently) shutter elements are not macro? Or for you, sir, is a macro something that can only be seen through a microscope?
in electronic))
Of course, macro!
Makrik for the full frame. Awesome thing and darling! In a word L-ka!
Dust / moisture protection, weighs a ton, but quality ... 2.8 aperture again, even though you can shoot a macro portrait.
No wonder that they recommend it means - https://buynbest.ru/luchshij-makroobektiv-canon/
A bit stingy - a quick review or a creative crisis?
has long been
Satisfied, Olezhka, satiated with GOOD and PREPARED reviews ...
Take the old review and the new one, then at least he is full though hungry - the old one is definitely wider and better
I repeat, you can’t write much about a lens of this class, you just need to take it and try it.
But much can be written about a deshovoy shitty objective?
Don't you think that you are not in the supermarket - present you point by point to the quality of service?
I just want quality reviews, such as Arkady can do and did before. Is that a lot?
I will tell you a little secret:
This project is personal, non-profit and is done on personal enthusiasm in accordance with the plans, mood, desire, wishes and capabilities of its author.
Therefore, if the author decided that a review should appear in one form or another, so be it.
If it deems it necessary to review the top glass in two paragraphs, so be it. If it turns out that it is interesting to cut the review of the lens from the enlarger, then it will be detailed, with a bunch of examples and conventions.
Not a man who, like you, does not undertake to do anything, but undertakes to judge and indicate that His Majesty would like to see, to calculate that his opinion means something.
Oleg, you try to do a review yourself and give us a link, after which we look at what YOU are capable of. Those who did the review themselves will understand me. This is not so easy as it seems at first glance. There are many details that can be missed when reviewing. And thanks to Arkady on such reviews. Arkady well done, he DOES at least something and does it for free for us (photographers) does on personal initiative, spending a lot of time on it. I've tried to review and now I know what it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVQjqh8OHu0
Here's an example link to my review. I do not pretend to be the coolest reviewer, but I ATTEMPT TO DO something. There can be no victory without attempts and mistakes. Try and make mistakes and someday fortune will smile at you.
Thank you) do the same!
I tend to the fact that if you do something, you must do it with complete dedication, and then it will stand for something. if you make 10 high-quality, full-fledged, non-commercial reviews, then in the future they will bring more benefits than 10 million reviews of 10 proposals. I tend to Arkady need to grow up, he has the potential. I DO NOT ATTEMPT to prove that I am better at photographing, or I can do a better review, I know that Arkady CAN do better, so I ask this. I want a lot? well, let him write reviews of the 3rd grade, and in a year his reviews will be useless to anyone, instead of surpassing Rockwell
Summing up, we can say that you, Oleg, do not consider it necessary to shoot yourself with complete dedication (you yourself say that you do not know how to shoot and do not learn), you do not undertake to write reviews with full or incomplete dedication for two or more years, but at the same time where then you undertake to decide and evaluate the work of Arkady, although you yourself cannot withstand your own requirements. This is called the banal hypocrisy of the consumer and, alas, is not worth much.
I also helped, now I’m going to have a stingy look.
for sure. less and less. however, there is no problem. This lens has already been reviewed and tested so many times that you can easily find a normal qualified report on this lens. including the difference between the old version and the new one and the pictures will be taken on the top unit or on Mark 3.
Pomsotrel, it costs $ 1000-1500. Yes, you go to yuh, photo bloggers, geniuses 25-frame in marketing, to saw.
It is not beautifully said in relation to the readers of this blog ...
I didn’t write it)) some other Oleg)
And not me. We other Oleg do not support him.
one and a half, not too high a price for good optics. Dragging is even quite normal.
For a macro lens, a typical price. Compare Nikon Pentax 100mm / 2.8
the lens costs about 700 dollars per hill. delivery of about 100. total, if desired, you can catch for 800-850doll.
In the examples there are both macro and portraits, (this is written by the way).
Thanks to Arkady for the review.
+1
“The focusing speed is fast, however, if in Full mode the lens still misses and starts focusing from MDF to infinity, then it takes him enough time to feel discomfort from the 'speed' of this process” - that is, nowadays, fast focusing is considered to be transition from 4m to 4m10cm? Previously, the speed was measured from the transition from MDF to infinity and vice versa
The review is not bad, you won't write much about a lens of this class. Photo - C grade. I would give more air space for the running boys and for the girl's gaze.
Well, Arkady always had pictures at 4 with a minus)
And don't hesitate, throw off the link to your album, it's always interesting to evaluate, so to speak, in comparison ...
I don’t say that I’m better off, but not worse, I think. But I do not review technology, so I’m probably excusable
READ KENAA ROWKWELL FROM HIM MILLIONS OF PHOTOS IN A REVIEW AS AND OTHER FATASITES) RADAISING IS ALSO ALIVE!
Rockwell finally Masday, on the number of public pulls) Arkady compared with him megaprofi)
Oleg, the question is about the photo, and not about the review of technology. Really, can I see your work?
http://vk.com/olehua - I say nothing special, I have ordinary photos
Z.Y. kament about the price of the lens I did not write
Horror! Everything is clear now!
Dmitry Osapchuk suspiciously what exactly your kament cannot be commented on))
Dmitry Osapchuk, then you will share your masterpieces for that matter))))
“Dmitry Osapchuk is suspicious that your comment cannot be commented on))” you have the same trouble. Masterpieces worse than yours, I shrink
then I would leave my comments to myself since I have horror and you have worse :)
On Radozhivka, the nesting limit of comments is 6 steps, otherwise they become very narrow.
I mean that the pictures in the reviews are such that absolutely any amateur photographer can take. There is no highlight
Probably because it’s uninteresting to shoot with different rubbish and reviews for a month with a tail of a million. A couple of three with a baby in the gallery is even very personal)
better to do 1-2 good reviews than a million so-so
Well, how to say. On Radozhiv there are many small reviews of technology about which there is nothing at all, and there is a description of the main and even examples.
Olezha, you are a master of original photographs “on the mountain” (2 dozen per day) and who knows how to write many large, full-fledged reviews on five pages.
Saw you your site, show us wise and miserable as you mag!
Two years later, if you can hold out, of course, we'll see who's worth what. ))
Everything is much simpler - I can't, that's why I don't write. Or did I write somewhere that I am an awesome master of writing reviews?
Somehow you begin to switch to personality. This is called OFFTOP !!! Guys, do not breed srach. Bright thoughts are welcome here, but not Rams
PS I am not the same Oleg
PPS Regarding photographs: Arkady does not show the ability to photograph, but the capabilities of technology. And if he were shooting worlds, would it be more interesting?
Exactly. Right Oleg discard the link to your photos. And we check it out)
Here I am not weak. I know that I take bad pictures, but I'm not ashamed to show.
http://www.pekarskas.com/
Because I don't consider myself a GURU of photography. I am a simple “village photographer”))))
Alexander is a modest man. Photos on the level. Many thanks to Arkady for the review, but I will not be able to afford such optics soon. Regarding the small amount of text in the review, I think that you can’t write a lot about professional technology that is practically devoid of flaws, unlike the cheap one, which has many compromise decisions that you need to know in order to get an acceptable result. Thanks again to the author.
Funny, in the text of this review, 8000 characters of text without spaces and without captions (counted for the sake of interest). Someone threw that Nikkor's review is much more voluminous, there are the same 8000 characters. Because all this is a very subjective attitude, no more.
actually threw off a long time ago
looked at your photos, a lot of interesting ones, you shoot better than me, I won’t argue
But what, a good makrik is a good makrik, what else can you say.
But the truth is, if Arkady happens to test Nikkor 105 2,8 AF-S VR Micro, then you really respect, not 20 lines, but more flowery somehow, and we’ll throw likes.
https://radojuva.com.ua/2013/01/obzor-nikon-af-micro-105-2-8-d/ Not af-s, but still not 20 lines as it is today. those who say that users have been fed up with colorful reviews and new ones seem to be crap - let them throw a tomato at me
Oleg, you do not compare the legendary Nikon lens and Sapogov L-:) Arkady simpotiziruet Nikon. ;)
so the fact is that Nikon reviews are now the same
I really did not begin to paint this review. In the case of Nikon, there is a lot of text due to the compatibility with cameras, falling F numbers, etc. In addition, the Canon lineup, I am really familiar with worse. Everyone who wants to unsubscribe that Radozhiva is not a Cake is a huge request, indicate what is missing in the review, what you would like to know, it will be much more interesting, and Ray will be much happier :)
I would like instead of 20 photos on the heap of a detailed description of the work on different F, different focal lengths, features of this model, backlit work, etc. .. And so all this info is also on photo.ru
I would like instead of 20 photos on the heap of a detailed description of the work on different F, different focal lengths, features of this model, backlit work, etc. .. And so all this info is also on photo.ru
Oleg, I looked at your photos, there are those that can be noted. But ... as I said, let's give space to look and movement, the model should not look to the side of the photo!
The critic criticizes and criticizes the critic. Arkady and Oleg respect for real photos, the rest go to yuh!
By the way, Arkady, is it possible that Rey is unhappy despite the lens belonging to the L-series? :)
Ray sad only because of some comments :)
Arm it with a banhammer :) By the way, what kind of sketch on the 4th photo?
It’s necessary to change the mascot girl for Radozhive :) on the Intel Celeron D processor photo
before writing a review, you need to read klab.foto.ru, forums - something to pick up there, add something from yourself, and write a quality review. And so it is clear to the moose that the lens for $ 1500 is good, and looking at examples in the net is not a problem either. I respect your work, you do a lot for us, but you have to write better and better over time, and not vice versa. It's a shame just, the audience won the first reviews, and then it goes for the number
So it's time to cover Radozhiva :), worked out my own :) I personally rarely come across a really interesting lens.
Well, how, how, only video reviews have begun, and already cover :)
After all, we need to go further :) we’ll open something else!
Covering is definitely not nada. If there are no new lenses, supplement, redo the old reviews. Your blog is good and informative, but there is still room to grow
Articles are constantly being finalized, probably more time is spent on this than on new ones.
Arkady, have you thought about video tutorials? For example, the way you talked about the lens, would you just talk about those “photo tricks”?
I’m doing this already, but it’s too early to put it on stream.
> before writing a review, you need to read klab.foto.ru, forums - something to pick up there, add something from yourself, and write a quality review.
On the forums they write such nonsense. Really, well, what is not in this review! The lens is good, photos, too, small things about how and where the screw is twisted?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXb-SWVQXH0
Already threw a few pieces :)
Arkady Shapoval, try to cover it! We know where you live! ;)
Great, come visit, I have a lot of albums, I have something to show :)
All so smart gathered. Arkady, do you get paid for reviews or is this personal time?
Of course they pay. Find a person who would spend his personal time on us for free. :)
This is not so :) I give a tooth) later I will try to finalize this review, to supplement it
blackjack and whoresabout which the afflicted ask :)Ark, you don’t need whores, give us the she-wolf!
To you with spices or apples. There are more options with hentai :)
I don’t get paid for the reviews. Site Details Here https://radojuva.com.ua/about-radojuva/ :) and I really write them on pure enthusiasm. For example, a young couple in this review was shot on TFP terms, for this you need to allocate time, and then give people not just RAW files, but also something modified. When shooting, I lost about 60% of the material for this review, because instead of changing the clogged USB flash drive, I just formatted it and continued to shoot (I thought that I already changed the flash drive, yes, yes, and it happens). As a result, a lot of headache :) on the weekend a lot of work on the main shooting and chew about the lens for 1000 cu really didn’t see the point, but apparently the public counted differently, I’ll take it into service. Thanks to all the unsubscribers.
Do you make lens pictures for reviews yourself or are you stealing from an Internet?
“Comrades, we will now sweep aside this remark from the audience with indignation.
As disorganized. ”(C)
I support - disrespect!
Well, specifically in this review, a description of the nature of the bokeh is very much asked for - it can be seen that point light sources outside the field of focus in the background at certain aperture values have the shape of a lemon, and besides, under certain circumstances, the background “swirls”, just like lenses of the family Helios. Still, it would not hurt to point out that this lens is hard-drawing and when shooting a portrait, it is necessary to process the images in the editor (in most cases).
The review is a little dopilny with the fulfillment of the requests of workers.
I’ve become insolent with the people !! I read comments and goof off! Yes, people should be grateful to you for your work, but they still spoil something! And cover you Radozhiva. When they become bored and have nothing to read at work, then they will sing it in a new way.
Z.Y. I liked the review. It seemed that the presentation style had slightly changed. There were just facts, figures and impressions, and now even with places of humor. Interesting.
No need to wave. Firstly, no one is uprooted, and secondly, everyone has the right to speak out.
Speak more ethically (this is not specific to you) - we are all civilized people. Moreover, in principle, Arkady is not obliged to do this. And he does it because there is a demand for good reviews, and he does it completely with a bare enthusiasm. Show respect for the person (this is again not for you. Here, many have distinguished themselves)
“First of all, the difficulties are associated with a small depth of field”
For stationary objects, you can use the stacking: Helicon Focus, Zerene Stacker, etc.
trouble ...
readers began to indicate how to write to a blogger ..
loser guys
I think that the main purpose of the photographs in the review is not to show the artistic taste of their author, but the technical capabilities of the lens. Those. in the context of this review, the presence of zest and plot in photographs is not important for us, the lens parameters are important to us. Therefore, in the review, in addition to beautiful photos, you still need to bring ugly (non-received) photos made in difficult conditions. And this is a macro lens, and in the review only 20% of macro photos, the remaining 80% is not at all macro. It may be more correct on the contrary.
Thanks for the review Arkady! After reading those comments that were posted here, by the way, there is nothing on the essence of the macro lens topic, continuous tantrums, whether reviews began to dry or dry, prompted and enough, what fuss to deliver is not essentially photographs, Arkady in any case decide what kind of reviews to fill out, man to work on enthusiasm, the bulk comes here stupidly to devour, in the information plan, not a drop of gratitude or some kind of comments on the topic in order to expand the review, suggests that the bulk did not hold this lens in their hands, and perhaps not when and this lens will not be used, for various reasons, but one commonly known one, and the one who uses and takes photographs is simply not up to him to comment, it is better to devote time to photography, Arkady’s patience and perseverance, worthy of your answer, by the way very worthy comments, + 1 to your karma.
Still, a macro lens is not a “portrait lens”. Campaign only high-aperture "eighty fiveyatka" draws in a portrait way. And the makriks are really tough. Although very sharp, and an irreplaceable thing in the household!
Some trolls are on a joyful now, the oldest lynx has even returned, there is nothing sensible in the comments, they spoiled such a good blog, it makes no sense to go here now, del [[[
Read the review and do not read kamenty
what a horror
This is what is called "cognitive dissonance" :) - there are many trolls in the comments, and the Lynx is to blame for all the sins. I suggest not to breed Kiselevism here. Thanks to Arkady for the review :)
it is not a discord.
it is, to put it mildly, an obsession.
Arkady, instead of lens prices - link “All prices for Nikon D Body”.
Arkady, here you are criticized for the information in the review, but let me criticize for something else. The word "for" has stuck to you. The word is old and you still need to know how to use it, although it's better to throw it out altogether)). This is of course a trifle, you can not pay attention, but it really hurts the eye. And so, everything is super. True, I was expecting another video review of this lens.
Maybe there are some other words that users do not like?
tokma if readers find it not the most euphonious because they are offensive to the hearing!
Arkady, remove the malicious rubbish. Listen to reasonable comments. And everything will be all right. Actually now everything is all right. Do not listen to embittered verbiage and sweet-voiced slime-eating. Remain in the middle.
Kozma Prutkov has a good saying:
"Do not go against the stream, do not go with the stream, but go wherever you want."
My Radozhiva did not open all night and all morning. Arkady did you decide to scare everyone?
Radozhiva went to the hospital, she had a severe disorder, hostigna.
Arkady, thank you very much for your work! One of the best Russian-language blogs about photos.
Arkady do not listen to anyone, your reviews are wonderful! Continue in the same spirit. I wish you sincerely creative success! Thank you for being there!
I’d better listen and read to Arkady, I tried to express my opinion once and enter into a dialogue in the Nikon group with Anton Petukhov, and left the group, except for his aplomb, nothing interesting, banal answers to common questions.
Clever 100 comments and not a single real comment on the review, all because the review is really good