# EF 100mm f2,8 L IS Macro... is IS worth it?



## Malte_P (Jun 21, 2013)

i have a tamron 90mm f2,8 macro and im very happy with it... except one thing.

sometime i don´t have a tripod with me or in some locations tripods are not allowed.
and then camera shake is an issue when i shoot handheld macros of flowers etc.

i would like to buy the EF 100 mm macro with IS. 
but i remember reading some comments that IS is pretty useless for macro.

did they mean because you should shoot on a tripod anyway ... or why is it that i read this comment quite often?


----------



## pharp (Jun 21, 2013)

At macro distances, the movement is primarily forward and back - IS doesn't help in that case. Faster shutter speed [even with higher ISO] or flash is a better answer.


----------



## Malte_P (Jun 21, 2013)

pharp said:


> At macro distances, the movement is primarily forward and back - IS doesn't help in that case.



yeah pretty logical.. still have not thought about that.


----------



## drjlo (Jun 21, 2013)

pharp said:


> At macro distances, the movement is primarily forward and back - IS doesn't help in that case. Faster shutter speed [even with higher ISO] or flash is a better answer.



Really? At macro distances and hand-held, if I turn off IS and look throught the VF, I see all kinds of shifting including horizontala and rotational, not just back and forth. IS certainly is not AS useful at macro distances but is still useful for me for hand-held macro shots, making the difference between getting the shot or not on my 100L..


----------



## awinphoto (Jun 21, 2013)

Is IS worth it... hell yeah


----------



## westr70 (Jun 21, 2013)

Yes. One of the best lens I have and it is superb.


----------



## bchernicoff (Jun 21, 2013)

I am no macro expert, but I find the IS easier to use than the Sigma 105 2.8 Macro I had before. That being said I am often trying to hand hold macro shots which is really not the way to do it. You pretty much have to use a tripod to get acceptable results, so no real benefit in an IS lens.

Overall, the Canon 100 L is a fantastic lens. It takes excellent tight portraits and the IS helps here.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 21, 2013)

IS is useful when taking pics handheld. The effectiveness of IS decreases the closer you get to 1:1, but it still helps. Most pics taken with macros are not 1:1 anyway. Serious macro users will use f/11 or smaller and use tripods/rails/flashes and focus stack. IS doesn't do you any good for using a lens this way, but for everyone else who wants to have macro capability and do most of it handheld, IS is a winner. IS also makes it more user-friendly as a portrait/general use lens.


----------



## robbinzo (Jun 21, 2013)

My advice is to try the 100L macro. It is excellent. The IS works very well - look through live view with IS on and off and the difference immediately becomes obvious. You have 9 apperture baldes and weather sealing to boot.
I've seen this thread numerous times asking is the 100L worth the extra money. I've not yet seen a reply by anyone that owns this lens saying they regret their purchase. 
If you can afford it, buy it!


----------



## mwh1964 (Jun 21, 2013)

I would most certainly get the 100L if I were in your shoes.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jun 21, 2013)

Malte_P said:


> i have a tamron 90mm f2,8 macro and im very happy with it... except one thing.
> 
> sometime i don´t have a tripod with me or in some locations tripods are not allowed.
> and then camera shake is an issue when i shoot handheld macros of flowers etc.
> ...


I sold my Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro & Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro and bought the EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS macro lens ... i100 L IS is far more sharper at f/2.8 than the Tamron or the Sigma ... the IS works really well and is a great help ... you will not regret buying the 100 L IS.
Regarding tripod, yes absolutely! no amount of Image Stabilization will work as well as a tripod ... but a tripod is not always convenient to carry around ... most of my macro shots happen at random places, like restaurants (most good restaurant have beautiful and interesting small objects), shopping malls etc and carrying a tripod to those places is not very convenient, so the IS helps a lot ... I tried photographing butterflies and dragonflies with a tripod, but by the time I could set up my tripod it was too late ... Image Stabilization really helps in such situations.


----------



## gilmorephoto (Jun 21, 2013)

Most definitely worth it, especially if you shoot handheld.


----------



## alexturton (Jun 21, 2013)

I sold my canon 100mm macro for the IS verison. I definately value the IS, it allows shutter speeds sometimes as slow as 1/30 handheld.

OBviously the closer you get the more ineffective the IS becomes


----------



## unfocused (Jun 21, 2013)

Another yes.

If you wanted a dedicated Macro lens that you only use on a tripod, then I suppose not. But, I shoot a lot more at "near macro" than I do true macro and I like to wander around outside getting close to things. 

Shooting macro in the field is very difficult. People who don't do it regularly don't always realize just how tricky it can be. It's a real challenge to get the tripod exactly where you want it to accurately frame the image in the the way you envision it. 

Remember, everything is magnified. The light can be perfect in one spot for 30 seconds and then a tiny shift and it's gone. An insect on a leaf will move out of the frame. The slightest breeze and your perfectly framed shot suddenly has shifted. An image looks perfect when you are kneeling on the ground, but shift your back slightly, and you lose it. 

I can't count the number of times when I've started out using a tripod and just gave up and switched over to hand holding, because I couldn't possibly position the tripod precisely where I wanted it or do it quickly enough so as not to lose the light or the framing.

Oftentimes I find myself framing an image, pre-setting the focus and then physically moving in closer or further away as I try to get the most interesting part of the subject in focus. That's pretty much impossible to do with a tripod, and the IS definitely helps. 

Plus, it's a great portrait lens and modest telephoto. Both things that make the IS very valuable.


----------



## greger (Jun 21, 2013)

Get the Canon 100mm 2.8 IS USM. B+H is selling it with their 2% savings sale for $899.00. I haven't used it on my tripod yet. I am very happy with this lens. I paid more when I bought 3 years ago but now seems to be a good time to buy.


----------



## serendipidy (Jun 21, 2013)

Absolutely! I love mine. IS helped a lot! 8)


----------



## chas1113 (Jun 21, 2013)

Definitely worth it. I upgraded from the 100mm Macro USM and this lens has made all the difference in the world. The advantages the L has over the 100mm macro USM are manifold: IS, of course, which helps for everything (close-ups outside the macro range), portraits, medium telephoto landscapes, etc; but the real benefits come from improved color, contrast and clarity over the older USM lens. The focusing ring has a much better feel and slightly longer throw for more precise manual focus. The 9-bladed aperture gives much better background blur. AND it's weather-sealed, as well. The price has been drifting lower and Canon refurbs make the choice a no-brainer. Go for the L!


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 22, 2013)

The L has better IQ. It is sharper and focuses better. If you try to take pictures of insects or butterflies in flight you will really appreciate the IS.

The 100L macro was the first L lens I bought. I agonized for a long time between the regular and the L version. Finally, I got to go for a walk with a copy of each and after using them side-by-side the answer was clear, go for the L.... It costs twice as much but you will never regret the decision.


----------



## Harry Muff (Jun 22, 2013)

Not much to add to the above apart from the fact that the IS messes with your head at first while looking through the viewfinder.


Awesome lens. Buy it now!


----------



## jdramirez (Jun 22, 2013)

I don't know about the quality of your lens... but I know the quality of the 100mm. I love that lens. It was easily my favorite lens in the past year. It is crazy versitile. Portraiture is solid (and while it might not be the 135 f/2, it is still awesome). Macro is amazing, although I will admit I only did a little bit of that. I didn't have the patience for the bug to slowly crawl into the scene. I used it as a sports lens for a while and got some real WOW shots. The f/2.8 comes in handy and I was getting 1/8000 of a second razor sharp images. 

Having said that... I'm selling my 100mm to get a 135. I have a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkii and it incredible as well. After I get bored with the 135, I'm going to an 85mm f/1.2... So in short... get the lens... it is well worth it.


----------



## gwflauto (Jun 22, 2013)

The EF 100mm f2,8 L IS Macro is my favorite lens right now. I shoot handheld most of the time and use it for pictures of objects, portrait and macro as well. IS is a great help for perfect shots. Contrast and sharpness are outstanding.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jun 22, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I can't count the number of times when I've started out using a tripod and just gave up and switched over to hand holding, because I couldn't possibly position the tripod precisely where I wanted it or do it quickly enough so as not to lose the light or the framing.
> 
> Oftentimes I find myself framing an image, pre-setting the focus and then physically moving in closer or further away as I try to get the most interesting part of the subject in focus. That's pretty much impossible to do with a tripod, and the IS definitely helps.


+1
Also, what most people don't realize is that many of the awesome macro shots of insects in magazines (using tripods) are of dead insects or those which have been kept in a fridge/freezer for 10 - 20 minutes, so they are in kind of a hibernating state i.e. not moving insects ... for that kind of macro photography tripods are the absolute best but for constantly moving/swaying subjects IS makes a huge difference.


----------



## insanitybeard (Jun 22, 2013)

Also, I don't think this has been mentioned so far, apologies if it has, the 100L macro has the hybrid IS which is supposed to be more effective than normal IS in macro photography for correcting lens shift.


----------



## gwflauto (Jun 22, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Also, I don't think this has been mentioned so far, apologies if it has, the 100L macro has the hybrid IS which is supposed to be more effective than normal IS in macro photography for correcting lens shift.


I never understood, what is the specific advantage of this hybrid IS?


----------



## insanitybeard (Jun 22, 2013)

gwflauto said:


> I never understood, what is the specific advantage of this hybrid IS?



See here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2009/7/22/canonhybridIS

It is meant to correct for movement in several planes. How effective it actually is, I cannot speak from experience.


----------



## tomscott (Jun 22, 2013)

One of my favourite lenses, I use it for food, product, macro, short tele and portraits its a great multifunctional lens.

Shot this yesterday in my garden




Wasp on flower by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr


----------



## infared (Jun 22, 2013)

I have one... was initially put off by the fact that it was an all plastic body for $1000.....but the lens is great...With the IS you can do macro "light" quite nicely...by that I mean...I can take hand-held macro shots that I could never shoot before...but.... any really serious macro work needs a tripod in my world...and I went into this purchase knowing that...macro is at the extreme end of photography...really testing the physics to get great images (focus stacking adds another option if you are truly dedicated)...but I feel that this lens has broken down some of the barriers and moved the quest forward... Also...I don't believe you will find a sharper L lens out there. Quite remarkable and very useful as a portrait lens etc. (that is actually where the IS can really shine...). Have not regretted the purchase.
Best comment above: "Is it worth it? Hell Yeah!!!! " LOL!


----------



## Harry Muff (Jun 22, 2013)

Most impressive! What aperture do you use for these kinds of shots?


----------



## pharp (Jun 22, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> If you try to take pictures of insects or butterflies in flight you will really appreciate the IS.



In flight insects?? IS won't help you with moving objects - so what if you can shoot @ 1/30? - image of live insect will be useless. Even flowers move in the wind, so again IS won't help. The L uses larger filters and needs an expensive adapter to mount the MR or MT flashes. If your *primarily* interested in macro, save your money and get a good flash and _learn how to use it_ for handheld shots. If not, the IS may be of value. I've had the USM version almost from introduction and I've always been very pleased with the results and never wished it had IS, but I use it almost exclusively for macro [1:3 - 1:1 and beyond with tubes]. I have other lenses [w/ IS] for other shooting situations.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Jun 22, 2013)

pharp said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > If you try to take pictures of insects or butterflies in flight you will really appreciate the IS.
> ...



Yes, but, IS does help a little with the movement you're required to make when tracking a subject  if you have to pan or tilt closer to the minimum required shutter speeds to freeze subject movement IS still might save you that perfect shot at angles that are more difficult to achieve with a tripod, let alone an angle that you can set up quickly.


----------



## pharp (Jun 22, 2013)

What I would prefer to IS for macro work would be pushbutton fine focus. If I miss, it's usually focus. I typically use manual focus and rock back and forth to nail it, but it would be GREAT to be able to brace and fine focus with pushbuttons. Just my opinion.


----------



## greger (Jun 23, 2013)

Malte_P maybe you should buy a ring light flash now and the 100mm IS Macro in the future. Try a search for Amaran
Halo LED ring light. I am going to do more research and maybe buy this flash at the end of summer. I thought your macros of bees to be quite good and hope I can do as well when I go into the garden to take pics of bees. I have used my 580 EX ll flash and it has helped a lot but I got a reflection that I didn't like on a Ladybug's back. I should have used the healing brush in PS to get rid of it before I printed.


----------



## bardamu (Jun 23, 2013)

I've currently got the 100mm non-L and I've shot literally tens of thousand of pics with it. When I researched the initial purchase of my gear I read that there was no difference in sharpness between the two and the IS wasn't really beneficial for 99% of my shooting, so I saved some money and went with the non-L, probably an ok decision at the time.

But now that I've shot a lot, advanced my gear collection a lot and read up more on L vs non-L I've decided that I will upgrade. Apart from IS there are a few other differences. The L is a tad sharper actually (see Photozone for example). The weather sealing is welcome, plus there is a focus-limiter switch and the L bokeh is better as well. Not sure how the Tamron compares, but the 100L seems good in many different areas.

I'd like to know if there is an AF advantage to using the L but I suspect that the body is a more important factor.

Interestingly I had the internal motor of my 100mm lens conk out one time, the rig just siezed up and said I needed to clean the contacts, but actually it was a motor problem. Cost me AU$260 to fix, but considering how much I've used the lens I wasn't really annoyed. But it has made me rather paranoid, so on serious macro holidays in future I will be taking along two lenses (100L/non-L and EF-S 60).


----------



## koolman (Jun 23, 2013)

I have all kinds of lenses. The ONLY lens I have that is simply superb in every way is the 100 L IS. Its AF is super fast, color rendering excellent, lightweight, and overall a pleasure to use. It is can perform many duties in addition to macro, portrait, artistic, etc.

I shoot a canon crop 550d.


----------



## eeek (Jun 23, 2013)

The only problem I have with the 100 2,8L IS macro is it didn't come with the tripod collar. When I got this lens, it was for a lot of 1/200, f/14, iso 100 1:1 close up macro work. However, now I've stepped back a bit and started trying to get backgrounds in my macro shots. The IS helps tremendously for that. I love everything about this lens. I had reservations about getting since I already owned the non IS version, but I am glad I went with it. One thing to mention is I can AF at close to 1:1 where you can't do that with the non IS. I'd prefer to be manual and rock back and forth but sometimes with some small insects, the AF just works better.


----------



## Malte_P (Jun 23, 2013)

[ooops


----------



## greger (Jun 23, 2013)

Congratulations on purchasing the 100 IS macro lens. Look forward to seeing your pics with this lens. I did some research on the Amaran Halo and will stick with using my 580 EX ll and my Gary Fong collapsable diffuser.


----------

