Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic. Review from the reader Radozhiva

Browse sample photos specifically for Radozhiva, prepared Alexey Shcherbakov.

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Main Specifications

Review Instance Name Canon EF 100mm f / 2 USM
Basic properties
  • EF - (Electro-Focus) - The lens is designed for Canon EOS full-length cameras. Suitable for Canon cameras with EF and EF-S mount.
  • FT-M - auto focus with constant manual correction
  • USM (Ultrasonic Motor) - Ultrasonic Focusing Motor
  • AF-MF (Auto Focus-Manual Focus) - the lens is equipped with a focus mode switch
  • GO - (Inner and Rear Focusing) internal focusing. The lens does not enlarge.
Front Filter Diameter 58 mm, metal thread for filters.
Focal length 100 mm, EGF for APS-C 1.6X cameras is 160mm, EGF for APS-H 1.3X cameras is 130mm.
Field of view angle (horiz / vert / diag) 20 °, 14 °, 24 °
Zoom ratio 1 X (this is a fixed lens, it does not have a zoom).
Designed by for full-format film cameras. Lens fits all Canon EOS SLR cameras
Number of aperture blades 8 (eight) rounded petals.
Tags bayonet mount red mark, focus distance scale in meters and feet. DOF Scale for F / 22. Label for working in the infrared spectrum.
Diaphragm F / 2.0 to F / 22
MDF 0.9 m, maximum magnification ratio 0.14 × or 1: 7
The weight November 460, XNUMX
Optical design 8 elements in 6 groups. The lens does not use special optical elements in its optical design.

Optical design Canon 100 F / 2Internal focusing. The front and rear lenses are fixed.

Lens hood Hood ET-65III, secured with two clamps
Manufacturer country LENS MADE IN JAPAN (lens made in Japan).
Period From October 1991 to the present
Price See
Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

General information

The Canon EF 100mm f / 2 USM is the logical continuation of its predecessor, the Canon New FD100mm f / 2 (1980). It has a compact size, comfortable ergonomics and is the best suited for portraits. At the moment, it is the only branded 100 mm autofocus lens with such a large (F / 2.0) aperture.
Quick focus. The focus ring rotates about 90 degrees. Hard stop has. Upon reaching the extreme positions, the course for a second or two becomes a little tight, signaling to us that we are at the final point, after which it simply scrolls further.

When focusing, the lens does not change size, does not leave anything and does not spin. You can comfortably use polarizing and gradient filters. The rear lens is also stationary, which eliminates the effect of a vacuum cleaner and minimizes the amount of dust inside the lens itself and the camera matrix, respectively.

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Image quality

The overall image quality can be rated as good. At full frame with a full aperture (f / 2.0), vignetting in 1-1,5 steps is clearly visible. Edits in the editor with the appropriate profile. With a one-stop aperture (up to f / 2.8), vignetting ceases to bother. For rare paranoids and perfectionists, an f / 4.0 value will sweep away all issues.

A few words about the vignette. In real portraits, vignetting is sometimes not noticed at all. Sometimes I even forget where it is removed by the editor, and where not. If you do not engage in nonsense like shooting brick walls, then you can not worry about this drawback.

Chromatic aberrations, like the vignette, disappear at f / 4.0. Everything before that is well treated in the editors. On correctly exposed frames, the chromaticity is minimal (see examples of the Solzhenitsyn monument).

With sharpness, everything is good on the open (it is “sufficient”) and in direct proportion to better with the subsequent cover.

This lens proved to be excellent at portraiture both indoors with natural light and outdoors. I still could not get the nuts in the background. Probably tried poorly :) The very same bokeh always turned out to be very soft, film-noble or something.

Distortion for third-party tests is about 0,5%, and you can not worry about it.

In a blind test, none of my friends photographers could distinguish shots from it from the L-series (100 mm 2.8L USM), which gave some of them an extra reason to think about investing in the upper segment of optics.

If the photographer does not see the difference, then, most likely, the client will not notice it either. When printed even on A4 format, the “lacquered” lens looked exactly like its half-cheap companion from this review. Most likely this happened due to the fact that there was no well-savvy marketer from Canon around who could convince me otherwise :)

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Features of focusing.

It is on this section that I want to draw your attention. Focusing caused some questions in the work of the hero of the review. It is clear that the quality of this depends on a variety of objective reasons: the focusing module, conditions, heterogeneity of objects (straight arms - naturally), etc.

Focusing itself is fast and tenacious, but not always accurate or, as I call it, “harmful”. The harmfulness depends on the specific camera models. For example, when shooting a test doll “head-on” with MDF on a Canon EOS 5D Mark 2, there are 4 hits out of 5 on one day, and on the other you had to set the edit to -8 (minus eight!). With a Canon EOS camera 450D this was not observed.

On the review page about EF 85 mm f / 1.8 says:

In 2010 on one sample of 5D Mark II, I got the best results with the focus micrometer set to +5. Otherwise it is consistently focused in front of the intended subject.

Either there is a variation in quality, or it is the eccentricities of a particular camera model.

As Ken Rockwell said about these two "twins": "Having one of them, the second is no longer needed." But I do not agree with him, tk. these are slightly different lenses.

Similarities to EF 85 mm f / 1.8

  • diameter under the filter 58 mm
  • Hood ET-65 III
  • issued to this day (over 25 years!)
  • produce similar image quality

Differences from EF 85 mm f / 1.8

  • 85 mm costs $ 430 versus $ 480 for 100 mm. 50 dollars for an additional 15 mm FR. Specifically, in my city, two of these lenses at a flea market are sold at about the same price (at $ 250 for the spring / summer of 2017), which was an advantage in favor of the longer)
    20 grams heavier if somehow felt in the process
  • 2 mm higher :)
  • metal thread under the filter
Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

About the hood

For some reason, this nuance was not voiced in the review about the EF 85 mm f / 1.8 USM. Fill this gap :)
In contrast to the usual fixing by means of a bayonet mount, the ET-65 III hood is mounted on four detent teeth by a groove, which is a one-piece ring on the edge of the lens. The clips themselves and the expanding design raise questions about their durability, but you should not worry - the loss can be easily restored in numerous online stores offering analogues on average from $ 4-5.
In addition to this anachronism, the hood itself is somehow round and unreasonably long. The use of a shortened petal rubber or threaded hood from a third-party manufacturer had an identical effect with equal lateral flare.
In the stowed position, the original hood completely blocks access to the focusing ring, significantly hides the numbers on the focus distance scale and makes it difficult to switch the focusing modes themselves.

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

General usage experience

The lens is well assembled and causes a feeling of a solid reliable thing. After a while, you cease to feel its weight, like the weight of the camera, completely leaving for the shooting process.

On crop cameras, the 1,6x focal length (160 mm) and a much smaller DOF, together with the middle travel of the focusing ring, creates some difficulties with manual focusing. Yes, it turned out that the ring travel of 90 ° is a very modest value for such a fast lens, I would like to be one and a half to two times more. A distance of 1/3/5/7 meters gives a rounded 0,7 / 6,6 / 18,6 / 36,7 centimeters of depth of field, respectively. Therefore, it was most comfortable for me to work on a full frame with “honest” values. Crop took a significant amount of time to get used to controlling the very narrow depth of field.

If it so happens that after a long unsuccessful search for the orthodox EF 85 mm f / 1.8, which all_ and_ everywhere_ advise, the opportunity to purchase this lens has turned up, feel free to take it. Image quality is similar, and the extra mm RF will only be on hand, forcing everyone to guess the secret of your pictures;)
It would be very kind of Canon to release the next revision of such an excellent lens, and very desirable with a stabilizer.

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic

Sample Photos

Examples of photos from ALL cameras were shot with the same settings: Picture style: STANDARD (3: 0: 0: 0), Sharpness - 3, Contrast - 0, Saturation - 0, Hue - 0, AWB.

Archive with source files here.

You will find more reviews from readers of Radozhiva here.

Add a comment:



Comments: 20, on the topic: Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic. Review from the reader Radozhiva

  • Molchanov Yuri

    Thanks for the great review. Everything is brief, in the case, and the pictures confirm every word.

  • anonym

    Thanks for the comment! Professionally and competently !!!

  • Ivan

    Finally, the well-tailored article from outside the author of which, in the presence of the brains of humor and experience in photography, still knows how to present itself correctly. And the modelka is standing. Well done!

    • Alexey

      If the author has experience in photography, then it manifests itself in the form of text, but not pictures, which he adds to the articles.

  • Review Author

    Thanks for the comments. If you have questions about the lens, feel free to ask

    • Ivan

      There is a proposal to do so that by clicking on the author of the review, his entire selection crawled out ... I mean, I liked it, I click on Shcherbakov and ... I fly to Vladivostok. And I hunt to read reviews)

      • Review Author

        Well, that’s a question for Arkady. Although, it is hardly worth bothering about this, because there are not many authors from the side on an ongoing basis.

    • Ivan

      Well, in particular, it would be interesting to review, for example, standing portraits on Boots or adjacent fixes for the portrait range, or to knock the thread with the muzzles or the photographer's set for any work to fully describe ... Well, even this I want to read. If you write well and interestingly, the demand will come from you. Somehow like this)

      • Review Author

        I don’t have such finances, so that I can put a number of competitors and examine them under a microscope. It is better to learn HOW TO REMOVE, and not ON WHAT TECHNIQUE.

        As for me, photography is not a profession, so everything is limited to rare walks with a photo brick on my shoulder.

        Standing portraits are 85mm f / 1.8 USM and 100mm f / 2.0 USM. 135L is a horse overpayment, and shaving Sigma needs to be adjusted to handle, not every client likes the end result.

        As a good alternative to Elkam - 85mm f / 1.8 from Tamron. For weddings, a stub helps better than a more open hole. A decent glass, but with its own nuances, which is strange at such and such a price!

        • Ivan

          Well, as for me, it is iron that is interesting. As noted here not so long ago, one aboriginal miracle worker I am not, although the experience is great. Therefore, something like this. At one time, Pts liked 80-200 4L. Probably the most honest photo fool in this range. Now I repair lenses for myself. The fungi there are different. I’ve got motor skills; I’m changing loops and stuff.

        • Ivan

          And by the way about the tampon ATP looked. The only question is that this is China and an infinitely weak construct inherent mainly to all topics of recent times with a hint of the Pro version ... Stub on the fix is ​​super long time ago, but the manufacturer ... there is no only branded things, the avaricious pays twice. Sigma ... well, to the same place ... 150-500 still wherever it went was cool at the time ... 30 50 fixes and 10-20 at the time of the norm but .... Not that. You hold it in your hands, but you don't weigh it ... Yours faithfully.

        • AND

          It was very interesting to hear the nuances of tamron 85. Looked at the reviews on it, too unanimous positive reviews on it. He has a pleasant picture by samples. As the owner of 100/2 - sometimes there is not enough stub, otherwise there are no complaints about the glass.

          • Ivan

            Here is the stub exactly it right!

  • York

    Hood with the same mount - magic drainpipe, 80-200 / 2,8. I have two of them, and two hoods - for many years there were no problems, although they look complicated and flimsy.
    In general, 100/2 is one of those glasses that open exactly on FF, on the crop it is not a cake that turns out specifically.

  • Alexander

    I recently purchased such a lens. The impressions are very positive. Very handy for outdoor portraits. Quite a good replacement for the more expensive and heavier 85f1,2 and 135f2,0. Using a hood is highly recommended. Indoors it also showed itself perfectly. If there is no finance for L lenses, it will not disappoint you.

  • Anton

    ehhhh, Vladivostok ...

  • Eugene

    Hello! I choose between this and Tokina 100 f2.8 macro, what tell me? What is more interesting? The Kenon 5d camera is the first (a couple of days since I switched to FF) and the tasks are artistic portraits, just for the soul. thanks

  • Victor

    Judging by examples of photos, reviews and tests on the Web, this 100 is probably the best Kenon autofocus glass from non-Elecs. What interests me in it first of all is: how does it work at infinity, is it suitable for shooting landscapes and highly detailed panoramas on a full-frame f / a?
    It was not possible to google right away when shooting distant shots with this glass: in the search results there are only portraits and games with bokeh ... :(

    • V.Matveev

      I asked myself - I answer myself: the subject is suitable for shooting landscapes and panoramas, and works well at infinity. More than enough sharpness throughout the frame on the Canon 5D, starting at f / 5,6 aperture. Great lens! Of the shortcomings, I would note all that freezing and excessive softness on open diaphragms (which, however, is forgivable for such a not-too-clever fix on simple glasses).

  • Roman

    About the hood, why “with the same mount and unreasonably long” - this hood was originally intended for the EF 135 / 2.8 SoftFocus, and then it was used on the EF 85 / 1.8 - EF 100 / 2.0. Naturally, it was designed for the longest lens.

Add a comment

Copyright © Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article

Version en español de este artículo