# Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS - Your opinion



## Mishel (Nov 12, 2009)

I currently don't have any macro lens, but I was thinking of buying Canon's new macro 'L' lens. The problem is that it is a little bit expensive and when I compared it to the older 100m f/2.8 (non L) lens, I could not see any differences, at least not such differences that will cause me to buy a more expensive lens like the Canon f/2.8L. Even though, I want to ear your opinion regarding this lens, and whether I should buy it or not.

I have problem making those decisions myself, and believe me that I have read 100 reviews on this Macro lens in the past week, so please help out.

The lens: Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS (great rating reviews from dpreview.com)

I also wanted to know about more macro lenses from other manufacturers like Zeiss, Tamron or Sigma. I have read good things, even excellent reviews about the Sigma 150mm Macro lens, and maybe I should also take it into consideration, need help deciding....


----------



## Derrel (Nov 13, 2009)

Tamron's 90mm f/2.8 is every bit as good as Canon's 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro. Canon's "old" non-USM macro extends very far when focusing close, as does the Tamron 90mm. The new L-series Canon macro tests out very well, but is very expensive. Personally, I'd look into a longer macro lens, a 150mm to 180mm model from Sigma or Tamron, rather than spend a fortune on a 100mm macro lens with IS.

For butterflies or insects or small animals, the longer 150 to 180mm macro lenses are handier. Not sure what you want to photograph most--flowers are different than insects,and you can use a shorter macro like a 90 to 100 or 105mm on florals and still be good.

Virtually ALL the 100mm f/2.8 to 180mm macro lenses produce good pictures--the Sigma and Tokina ATX, the Tamron 90 and 180, the Canon EF and the EF-L, Nikon 105VR, ALL the new macro lenses are good performers.


----------



## Hardrock (Nov 13, 2009)

I love my 100mm canon f2.8 macro lens. I am constantly hunting bugs with this lens. The lens is a great lens as far as comparing to the L series the only experience I have is in the store. I personally didn't see the $400 dollar difference but I was taking pictures in the store. I would think If you are shooting handheld at 1:1 you are better off with the 100mm over the 150 to 180 due to the fact of camera shake. Im pretty sure you would have to use a tripod most of the time with the longer focal length lens. As far as Im concerned  you can't go wrong with the canon 100mm macro and will be very happy. Oh and dont forget you will also need a flash of some sort to get any kind of dov. Sorry for being so lengthy but I went through you same decisions to try and figure out what was needed.


----------



## pugnacious33 (Nov 13, 2009)

The Tokina 100 macro gets great reviews and is only 400 bucks new.


----------

