Canon 180mm f3.5 v Canon 100mm f2.8 IS

[Sheiky]

how great his new 100mm macro lens is

It is great! It has weather-sealing, very good optics, image stabilization. Good features that make it very practical for other uses than macro-photography as well. It's also a lot cheaper, like 40%.


However I must also say that I like the view of a 180mm macro more. And since you're working with a tripod the IS isn't necessary.


If I had the money to spend(I don't) on special equipment for each purpose I'm not sure if I had bought the 100mmL. Probably also not the 180mmL, but the 65mm MP-E...

I know a guy who goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on............ about how great his new 100mm macro lens is.

Did you compare his shots vs your shots? Most of the time that's the best way to solve these differences []Don't bother too much, there will always be $%^&$# around [] Too many to pay attention to what they all have to say.


Jan

[HDNitehawk]

Did you compare his shots vs your shots? Most of the time that's the best way to solve these differences [img]/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]Don't bother too much, there will always be $%^&$# around [img]/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img] Too many to pay attention to what they all have to say.

You know both of these lens will show you the finedetail of a bee's butt.

[Jon Ruyle]

You know both of these lens will show you the finedetail of a bee's butt.

Which, of course, is the whole point


Both lenses will often be diffraction limited at close range.