# The focus shift issue with the Canon RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro revisited in revised review



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 7, 2021)

> Bryan at The-Digital-Picture completed his full review of the Canon RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM last month, and one of the negative issues that stood out was the focus shift that he experienced with the new RF macro lens.
> In the spirit of being thorough, Bryan got himself a second copy of the RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro to see if he had received a bad copy, or if the shift was by design. It looks like it’s the latter.
> Did I get a bad copy of the Canon RF 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM Lens? My guess was no. Supporting that theory was a technical rep confirming the issue with his lens. The test results shared above have been forwarded to the Canon lens team in Japan. Read the full review
> If you only want to read about the focus shift issue and see the tests, just do a search (CTRL-F /...



Continue reading...


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 7, 2021)

The standard, though, has been set by Canon's other macro lenses. I don't remember personally having this issue with the ef 100 macros, either standard or L series; nor do I remember reviews mentioning focus shift as an issue with them.

I do remember focus shift in the ef 50mm 1.2L being debated for years.

Canon could do all a favor by issuing a statement--or fixing in firmware if possible.

I wonder if incorporating the CA control function was part of the design issue that produces the focus-shift detected by Bryan and the tech he spoke with.

I am extremely satisfied with my ef 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS on the R5/R6, so for now this isn't going to affect me.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 7, 2021)

YuengLinger said:


> The standard, though, has been set by Canon's other macro lenses. I don't remember personally having this issue with the ef 100 macros, either standard or L series; nor do I remember reviews mentioning focus shift as an issue with them.
> 
> I do remember focus shift in the ef 50mm 1.2L being debated for years.
> 
> ...



The EF 50mm f/1.2L definitely had focus shift issues early on. I'm pretty convinced Canon tweaked things over the years to minimize it. For whatever reason, it didn't have a floating element.

I don't shoot macro very often, but when I do, I still use the non-L EF 100mm f/2.8.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 7, 2021)

I wonder if while doing his "running and gunning" he is moving the CA ring. Or if it's offset so slightly that he simply doesn't observe it. I don't have an issue with mine.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 7, 2021)

jam05 said:


> I wonder if while doing his "running and gunning" he is moving the CA ring. Or if it's offset so slightly that he simply doesn't observe it. I don't have an issue with mine.


Well, the "running & gunning" doesn't exhibit the issue as it only appears at max magnification.


----------



## juststeve (Aug 8, 2021)

The EF 24-70/4 L had a focus shift issue at first. Reportedly, it showed up mainly as softness at 50mm. I bought mine a couple years after introduction and have had very high performance across its full range and it is used almost always on a 5DS, not a forgiving camera. I think the softness at mid-range on that lens was something Canon could correct in firmware.


----------



## Ian K (Aug 8, 2021)

jam05 said:


> I wonder if while doing his "running and gunning" he is moving the CA ring. Or if it's offset so slightly that he simply doesn't observe it. I don't have an issue with mine.


The SA ring has a lock that would prevent this. It can only be locked at 0, much as the zoom lock can only be locked at minimum extension.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 8, 2021)

I've been using the RF100L almost exclusively with electronic shutter which does a good job of hiding this issue. With 20fps I can pick the best focussed picture of the set and after the first shot, the R5 will *refocus with the aperture stopped down*, with MS or EFCS it will open up the aperture between each shot to focus.

I do wish Canon will ship a lens firmware that allows full-time-manual focus override, like the 100-500 has.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Aug 8, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> The EF 50mm f/1.2L definitely had focus shift issues early on. I'm pretty convinced Canon tweaked things over the years to minimize it. For whatever reason, it didn't have a floating element.
> 
> I don't shoot macro very often, but when I do, I still use the non-L EF 100mm f/2.8.


I've owned and sold 3 ef 50mm f1.2 L lenses over the years. I found that using outer AF points and using the focus and re-compose trick worked pretty much every time. I love the contrast, colours and low flare from this lens. I found the AF in low light to be appalling...even my 24-70 f2.8 L mk 1 focussed in lower light and that's 2 stops dimmer. However the inerrant softness compared to other Canon ef L Primes was intolerable. The last of the 3 copies that I bought was a wee bit sharper and certainly seemed to AF a bit better. However they were all comparatively soft. I have an early metal mount 50mm f1.8 if I want a 50mm prime and I shoot that wide open. 
I regularly use a ef 100mm USM L Macro, it's a fantastic lens. I just wished Canon got around to updating the ef 180mm L macro before Canon went all out RF mount.


----------



## jd7 (Aug 8, 2021)

juststeve said:


> The EF 24-70/4 L had a focus shift issue at first. Reportedly, it showed up mainly as softness at 50mm. I bought mine a couple years after introduction and have had very high performance across its full range and it is used almost always on a 5DS, not a forgiving camera. I think the softness at mid-range on that lens was something Canon could correct in firmware.


The softness around 50mm on the EF 24-70/4L IS is a separate issue from focus shift. My 24-70/4L IS was soft at about 50mm when I bought it (some years ago now!), but I sent it to Canon for calibration and the lens has been excellent since then. A very under-rated lens, in my opinion. (Yes, I do have 24-70/4L IS, even though it's not in my signature now. I recently picked up a 24-70/2,8L II as my photography needs (wants?!) have a changed and I have greater use for a 2.8 zoom for that range, but previously I was very happy with the 24-70/4L IS for landscapes/travel/walk-around and primes for portraits / environment portraits. I guess I will keep the 24-70/2.8L II and sell my 24-70/4L IS but I'm still deciding, and if I sell the 24-70/4L IS I know there will be times when I will miss it.)

In any event though, focus shift on the 24-70/4L IS is never something which has been an issue for me, but if it's there you should see it when shooting close up shots and at about f/5.6 or so (perhaps f/8). The issue is the camera focussing (correctly) initially, but the focus point moving when the lens stops down when you take the shot. It was certainly an issue reported in some of the early reviews, but as I say it has never been an issue for me. I've never gone looking for it though, and I haven't take a lot of close up shots with that lens, so it's not impossible it's there but it just hasn't been relevant to me.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 8, 2021)

GMCPhotographics said:


> [..]
> I regularly use a ef 100mm USM L Macro, it's a fantastic lens. I just wished Canon got around to updating the ef 180mm L macro before Canon went all out RF mount.


I went out to shoot dragonflies in a bog shortly after dawn this weekend and I brought the RF100L, RF100-500L and the EF180L. At first light the 180L on a tripod was great, it allowed me to practice sneaking up on the dragons while they were still cold. After the wind picked up I switched to handholding the RF100L and immediately noticed the better AF, but filling the frame was a lot harder without spooking them.
When it warmed up enough to have the dragonflies swarming, the RF100-500L was the best tool for the job, even more working distance, nice and fast AF and enough support from the combined IS to drop below 1/focallength.

This furthered my conviction that a 200-ish mm 1:1 macro lens with dual nano-USM and IS would be a worthwhile replacement. Dual nano-USM is very, very good at what it does.


----------



## aceflibble (Aug 8, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> This furthered my conviction that a 200-ish mm 1:1 macro lens with dual nano-USM and IS would be a worthwhile replacement. Dual nano-USM is very, very good at what it does.


Sigma's ''old'' (2012) 180mm f/2.8 OS HSM Macro is what you want, then. It came in just months before they rebranded with the Art, Sports and Contemporary stylings, so it has their older gold ring look, though it was developed at the same time as the first couple of Art lenses and it is on par with them both in optics and focus. It's got just a hair less contrast at f/2.8 than the Canon lens does at f/3.5, but by the time you stop them both down to just f/4 the Sigma takes the lead. It is heavier than the Canon 180mm and a little bit larger overall, but if you can cope with the 100-500 then you can cope with the Sigma; it's the exact same size as the 100-500 is, without the extending barrel. It works very well with a 1.4x extender, too. (I don't remember ever using it with a 2x, so I won't vouch for that.) Stabilisation of course varies per user and camera resolution, but for me on the 5DS R I often shot it at 1/60th, which is as slow as I ever risk for living subjects anyway, with no shake. if Sigma had just held off the release until they could rebrand it with the 'Art' designation, I believe that 180mm would be one of their more famous lenses, instead of one of their most obscure, and it'd be known as _the_ insect lens.

Realistically if either Canon or Sigma (or Tamron, Tokina, or whoever else) were to make a newer equivalent, I doubt it'd actually be any different from the 2012 Sigma other than the styling on the outside.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 8, 2021)

aceflibble said:


> Sigma's ''old'' (2012) 180mm f/2.8 OS HSM Macro is what you want, then. It came in just months before they rebranded with the Art, Sports and Contemporary stylings, so it has their older gold ring look, though it was developed at the same time as the first couple of Art lenses and it is on par with them both in optics and focus. It's got just a hair less contrast at f/2.8 than the Canon lens does at f/3.5, but by the time you stop them both down to just f/4 the Sigma takes the lead. It is heavier than the Canon 180mm and a little bit larger overall, but if you can cope with the 100-500 then you can cope with the Sigma; it's the exact same size as the 100-500 is, without the extending barrel. It works very well with a 1.4x extender, too. (I don't remember ever using it with a 2x, so I won't vouch for that.) Stabilisation of course varies per user and camera resolution, but for me on the 5DS R I often shot it at 1/60th, which is as slow as I ever risk for living subjects anyway, with no shake. if Sigma had just held off the release until they could rebrand it with the 'Art' designation, I believe that 180mm would be one of their more famous lenses, instead of one of their most obscure, and it'd be known as _the_ insect lens.
> 
> Realistically if either Canon or Sigma (or Tamron, Tokina, or whoever else) were to make a newer equivalent, I doubt it'd actually be any different from the 2012 Sigma other than the styling on the outside.


When I bought the EF180L last year I considered the Sigma 180mm, but it has a few things against it, the most important one that it wasn't in stock anywhere and when asked I received replies like "We aren't get any new deliveries." The other thing against it is that the IS on my and Sigma 150 OS and (now sold) EF100L don't play well with the IBIS in the R5.


----------



## pj1974 (Aug 9, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> When I bought the EF180L last year I considered the Sigma 180mm, but it has a few things against it, the most important one that it wasn't in stock anywhere and when asked I received replies like "We aren't get any new deliveries." The other thing against it is that the IS on my and Sigma 150 OS and (now sold) EF100L don't play well with the IBIS in the R5.



Hi koenkooi

Could you please explain / expand on how the EF100L does not play well with the R5's IBIS? 
I have the EF100L, and when I go full RF (likely R5 or similar), I would really like to know any issues about this lens beforehand.

Many thanks (in advance)!

PJ


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 9, 2021)

pj1974 said:


> Hi koenkooi
> 
> Could you please explain / expand on how the EF100L does not play well with the R5's IBIS?
> I have the EF100L, and when I go full RF (likely R5 or similar), I would really like to know any issues about this lens beforehand.
> ...


In some situations I get better shots with IS turned off, handholding at 1/250th focussed at MFD using electronic shutter or EFCS. On the RP (with EFCS) I didn't have the slight blurring. It doesn't happen often, but often enough to be noticable. If you are better at handholding the camera, you might not have that issue 

It might not be the IBIS, it could be the R5 being heavier than the RP leading to more stress on my wrists or something like that. I get nowhere near the slow shutterspeeds other people can get in similar situations. Whatever is causing it, the RF100L can handle it.

I wouldn't hesitate to use the EF100L on an R5/R6 with IS turned on, just check the results while taking pictures. With in-EVF review you don't have to change posture or take your eye from the EVF!


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 9, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> When I bought the EF180L last year I considered the Sigma 180mm, but it has a few things against it, the most important one that it wasn't in stock anywhere and when asked I received replies like "We aren't get any new deliveries." The other thing against it is that the IS on my and Sigma 150 OS and (now sold) EF100L don't play well with the IBIS in the R5.


I wasn't going to be the first to bring up the Sigma 180mm, but since somebody did...

On my R5, the IBIS and IS are working together surprising well. I say surprisingly because the 180mm is an older lens and it is very heavy and long. But it works about as well as does my ef 100mm f/2.8L IS, when I take into account the longer focal length. In other words, I up the shutter speed by about 2/3 of a stop and seem to get the roughly same results. I do think that the IS/IBIS must be working better for me, as there are so many more pixels on the R5, and it stays sharp in my typical handheld range of 1/150th to 1/640th. My hands are not super steady, so I've gone with higher shutter speeds for years now.

One thing to note, though, is that the Sigma 180mm does have very good IS all on its own. Just a little noisy compared to the latest and greatest.

That said, I shoot with it primarily on a tripod. My little boy asked why I use such a long lens to take pictures of bugs, and I explained that I can be a little further back. Then last week he got stung--really stung--mid-thigh by a wasp as he was playing with some flower buds on a shrub. When he saw me yesterday with the 180mm he said, "That's for bees and wasps, right, Dad?"

It was my impression, when I bought the 180mm, that it was a step above other Sigma lenses at the time, both in terms of optics and build quality. About a year later I bought the Sigma 35mm Art when it came out, and sensed a lot of similarities. I never tried a Sigma 150mm, but the only person I know who had one was frequently complaining about his copy's IQ.

I was sad to see the Sigma 180mm go out of production. It also takes wonderful closeup portraits! (But it is too heavy for casual use.)

I'd love to see both Sigma and Canon competing with some longer and lighter macros.

The attached was taken handheld some years back with a 5DIII at f/4, 1/640th, ISO 640. Same little boy who got stung last week!

Also attached is another shot, but this on a tripod. Just for fun. 5DIII, f/8, 1/15th, ISO 320. Focus is on Batman.

And, btw, nodding to the topic, I never noticed a focus-shift issue with this longer focal-length macro.


----------



## pj1974 (Aug 9, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> In some situations I get better shots with IS turned off, handholding at 1/250th focussed at MFD using electronic shutter or EFCS. On the RP (with EFCS) I didn't have the slight blurring. It doesn't happen often, but often enough to be noticable. If you are better at handholding the camera, you might not have that issue
> 
> It might not be the IBIS, it could be the R5 being heavier than the RP leading to more stress on my wrists or something like that. I get nowhere near the slow shutterspeeds other people can get in similar situations. Whatever is causing it, the RF100L can handle it.
> 
> I wouldn't hesitate to use the EF100L on an R5/R6 with IS turned on, just check the results while taking pictures. With in-EVF review you don't have to change posture or take your eye from the EVF!


Many thanks koenkooi for your detailed, and very helpful reply.

That certainly will be something I'll keep in mind. I count myself 'medium ability' when it comes to steady hands for photography.

I really love the EF100mmL macro, and hopefully it'll serve me well when I get a Canon RF camera. I will definitely keep an eye on any slight blurring that might come up with IS on.

I like the in-EVF review in my M5, I can imagine I'd like it even more in a FF mirrorless.

Regards,

PJ


----------



## pj1974 (Aug 9, 2021)

YuengLinger said:


> I wasn't going to be the first to bring up the Sigma 180mm, but since somebody did...
> 
> On my R5, the IBIS and IS are working together surprising well. I say surprisingly because the 180mm is an older lens and it is very heavy and long. But it works about as well as does my ef 100mm f/2.8L IS, when I take into account the longer focal length. In other words, I up the shutter speed by about 2/3 of a stop and seem to get the roughly same results. I do think that the IS/IBIS must be working better for me, as there are so many more pixels on the R5, and it stays sharp in my typical handheld range of 1/150th to 1/640th. My hands are not super steady, so I've gone with higher shutter speeds for years now.
> 
> ...


Really helpful post, YuengLinger...

I appreciate you taking the time to write, and share your interesting experiences with the Sigma 180mm macro. I have also heard a number of others saying how much they like that lens.

When that lens first came out, I was also looking at that as a possibility (instead of the Canon 100mm macro) - but I decided to go with the Canon, because it was my first macro, and I felt maybe less specialist than the Sigma.

Great photos that you attached, both have high image quality (sharpness, contrast, great colour), etc. Thanks for sharing!

PJ


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 9, 2021)

YuengLinger said:


> [..]It was my impression, when I bought the 180mm, that it was a step above other Sigma lenses at the time, both in terms of optics and build quality. About a year later I bought the Sigma 35mm Art when it came out, and sensed a lot of similarities. I never tried a Sigma 150mm, but the only person I know who had one was frequently complaining about his copy's IQ.
> [..]


My copy of the Sigma 150mm was sharper than my EF100 non-L, even in the 150mm + 1.4x Sigma extender case. Comparing it against the EF100L it was sharper without the extender and slightly worse with the extender. I haven't compared it against the RF100L or against the RF100-500L, but I think it's probably in between those 2.

If the Sigma 180mm is considered a step above the 150mm, I might develope some buyers remorse for the EF180L


----------



## Viggo (Aug 10, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> I've been using the RF100L almost exclusively with electronic shutter which does a good job of hiding this issue. With 20fps I can pick the best focussed picture of the set and after the first shot, the R5 will *refocus with the aperture stopped down*, with MS or EFCS it will open up the aperture between each shot to focus.
> 
> I do wish Canon will ship a lens firmware that allows full-time-manual focus override, like the 100-500 has.


I didn’t know electronic shutter focused stopped down? Any source for this?

I just tried filming it in slow mo and it does stop down.


----------



## aceflibble (Aug 10, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> If the Sigma 180mm is considered a step above the 150mm, I might develope some buyers remorse for the EF180L


It is. The only macro lenses I've ever encountered that were sharper and better-corrected than the Sigma 180mm are the original Sigma 150mm (the non-OS original is a_ lot_ better optically than the OS revision), the Zeiss 100mm f/2 and the Canon TS-E 135mm f/4L. Those all have their own drawbacks, though. The original Sigma 150 has no stabilisation and a focus motor which is, shall we kindly say, "retro", and the Zeiss and Canon are both all-manual and only give 0.5x magnification, though of course a little extension gets them to 1.0x very easily. The Sigma 180mm is only a hair behind those three and much more practical (bar the weight). I wish the Canon 180 was as good or would be revised, since its AF is _slightly_ better and a new one would presumably have _much_ better AF, but as it stands the Sigma is the better optic and gives you stabilisation (yes, it doesn't give you the full 5000 stops of IS Canon's own lenses do on an R5, but 'just' a couple of stops of stabilisation is better than none at all), which in the field (both figuratively and, quite often, _literally_ in a field) makes it the better buy.

... Y'know, if you can find someone willing to part with one. There's a reason they don't come up for sale often and when they do people usually ask for the full new retail price, even for a copy that's a bit scratched up.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 11, 2021)

Viggo said:


> I didn’t know electronic shutter focused stopped down? Any source for this?
> 
> I just tried filming it in slow mo and it does stop down.


I haven't found a statement from Canon, but the aperture on my 180L is very slow and loud, so with EFCS it won't to 12fps and you can hear the iris opening and closing. It makes me think of pac-man: wakka wakka wakka wakka. With e-shutter I only hear the iris once and I get 20fps 

But to answer both aspects of your question: it focuses wide-open, but during shooting it (obviously) stops down and will also re-focus while stopped down. If you take your finger of the shutter it will open up again.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 11, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> I haven't found a statement from Canon, but the aperture on my 180L is very slow and loud, so with EFCS it won't to 12fps and you can hear the iris opening and closing. It makes me think of pac-man: wakka wakka wakka wakka. With e-shutter I only hear the iris once and I get 20fps
> 
> But to answer both aspects of your question: it focuses wide-open, but during shooting it (obviously) stops down and will also re-focus while stopped down. If you take your finger of the shutter it will open up again.


I didn’t release my finger when shooting at f8 at 20 fps, somehow I can’t upload the video here…


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Aug 12, 2021)

aceflibble said:


> Sigma's ''old'' (2012) 180mm f/2.8 OS HSM Macro is what you want, then. It came in just months before they rebranded with the Art, Sports and Contemporary stylings, so it has their older gold ring look, though it was developed at the same time as the first couple of Art lenses and it is on par with them both in optics and focus. It's got just a hair less contrast at f/2.8 than the Canon lens does at f/3.5, but by the time you stop them both down to just f/4 the Sigma takes the lead. It is heavier than the Canon 180mm and a little bit larger overall, but if you can cope with the 100-500 then you can cope with the Sigma; it's the exact same size as the 100-500 is, without the extending barrel. It works very well with a 1.4x extender, too. (I don't remember ever using it with a 2x, so I won't vouch for that.) Stabilisation of course varies per user and camera resolution, but for me on the 5DS R I often shot it at 1/60th, which is as slow as I ever risk for living subjects anyway, with no shake. if Sigma had just held off the release until they could rebrand it with the 'Art' designation, I believe that 180mm would be one of their more famous lenses, instead of one of their most obscure, and it'd be known as _the_ insect lens.
> 
> Realistically if either Canon or Sigma (or Tamron, Tokina, or whoever else) were to make a newer equivalent, I doubt it'd actually be any different from the 2012 Sigma other than the styling on the outside.


I used to have a Sigma 180mm macro. it's AF was pretty awful compared to the canon version...and the images weren't as sharp or as nice. It looked like it massively dropped focal length as I focussed in. When I compared the ef 180mm macro from Canon it was a night and day experience. My ef 100mm LIS Macro is even better Af wise...which is why i wish canon had made a 180mm L macro II.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Aug 17, 2021)

Ian K said:


> The SA ring has a lock that would prevent this. It can only be locked at 0, much as the zoom lock can only be locked at minimum extension.


i just got mine. what the firmware version. mine says 1.1.1.


----------



## Ian K (Aug 17, 2021)

RayValdez360 said:


> i just got mine. what the firmware version. mine says 1.1.1.


I haven’t got it, but there are no firmware updates available on Canon’s website. Others may comment.


----------



## SonicStudios (Aug 17, 2021)

Ahhhhhh Gezzzz, come on Canon, what's up with not supplying a tripod mount ring for the RF100 Macro? Really, you want 200 dollars more for the ring, come on. You supply a mount ring for the short RF70-200 for free, but for this new longer lens your now going to start charging for mount rings? Just add the price to the cost and ship them out when there in stock


----------



## jprusa (Aug 18, 2021)

SonicStudios said:


> Ahhhhhh Gezzzz, come on Canon, what's up with not supplying a tripod mount ring for the RF100 Macro? Really, you want 200 dollars more for the ring, come on. You supply a mount ring for the short RF70-200 for free, but for this new longer lens your now going to start charging for mount rings? Just add the price to the cost and ship them out when there in stock


I had to buy a lens hood for my 800 f11 ??


----------



## Bdbtoys (Aug 18, 2021)

jprusa said:


> I had to buy a lens hood for my 800 f11 ??


But that's not an L (not saying they shouldn't include them, but they typically don't). However, L's usually include things like hoods and lens specific mounts... so I feel it's a shame they didn't include one either.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Aug 18, 2021)

Ian K said:


> I haven’t got it, but there are no firmware updates available on Canon’s website. Others may comment.


i am asking in case they shipped them with a new firmware.


----------



## FrenchFry (Aug 18, 2021)

RayValdez360 said:


> i am asking in case they shipped them with a new firmware.


My lens was shipped on the first day available and it has 1.1.1 like yours.


----------



## SonicStudios (Aug 18, 2021)

jprusa said:


> I had to buy a lens hood for my 800 f11 ??





Bdbtoys said:


> But that's not an L (not saying they shouldn't include them, but they typically don't). However, L's usually include things like hoods and lens specific mounts... so I feel it's a shame they didn't include one either.


Ahhhhhh, that i did not know. I'll keep that in mind when i order the RF 300


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2021)

SonicStudios said:


> Ahhhhhh Gezzzz, come on Canon, what's up with not supplying a tripod mount ring for the RF100 Macro? Really, you want 200 dollars more for the ring, come on. You supply a mount ring for the short RF70-200 for free, but for this new longer lens your now going to start charging for mount rings? Just add the price to the cost and ship them out when there in stock


The EF 100L Macro did not come with the tripod mount ring, nor did the EF 70-300L or the f/4 versions of the EF 70-200L. The f/2.8 versions of the EF 70-200 lenses came with the tripod mount ring.


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 18, 2021)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I used to have a Sigma 180mm macro. it's AF was pretty awful compared to the canon version...and the images weren't as sharp or as nice. It looked like it massively dropped focal length as I focussed in. When I compared the ef 180mm macro from Canon it was a night and day experience. My ef 100mm LIS Macro is even better Af wise...which is why i wish canon had made a 180mm L macro II.


I can't compare the AF of the Sigma 180 to the Canon 180mm, but the image quality on mine is top notch, super sharp and with lovely contrast and bokeh. The R5 gives it a whole new life, and the AF is fast and accurate for sure. Whether or not I have an exceptional copy seems pretty tough to determine in 2021.

As I stated earlier, it exhibits no focus-shift. Neither does my EF 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro.

And I haven't noticed a stampede of other reviewers reporting the issue, but maybe my Google isn't working.


----------



## canonmike (Aug 18, 2021)

jprusa said:


> I had to buy a lens hood for my 800 f11 ??


Knowing the RF 800 comes without a hood, I ordered an aftermarket one on ebay the same day I ordered the lens. Rec'd the hood before the lens, so I was ready. I have no problem with these hoods on non L bodies and this hood, costing less than $20.00 has worked out well. Now, to find an aftermarket pack that will hold the lens, without removing my R6 body.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 14, 2021)

Bryan @ TDP posted the information he received from Canon's engineers:

"_...due to its 1.4x magnification (1.4:1 reproduction ratio) capability, a magnification far exceeding 1.0x, the RF 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS Lens's optical design exhibits some focus shift.

The focus shift is not sample dependent and is not related to the SA control ring. As focus shift is characteristic of this lens, no production changes to the lens or lens/camera firmware updates are anticipated. Correction, when necessary, is accomplished by focusing slightly in front of the subject._"









Conclusion to the Canon RF 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM Lens Focus Shift Inquiry


Conclusion to the Canon RF 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM Lens Focus Shift Inquiry — The-Digital-Picture.com




www.the-digital-picture.com


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 15, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Bryan @ TDP posted the information he received from Canon's engineers:
> 
> "_...due to its 1.4x magnification (1.4:1 reproduction ratio) capability, a magnification far exceeding 1.0x, the RF 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS Lens's optical design exhibits some focus shift.
> 
> ...


That's a weird reply from Canon, focus-shift is something the firmware could very well compensate for since it knows the actual position of the focus motors and hence the exact focus distance.
And did Canon just imply that their AF should be avoided?


----------



## Del Paso (Oct 15, 2021)

Along with the RF 14mm TS, this is the RF lens I wanted to buy.
Since I'm often, when trekking, doing hand-held macro , AF can sometimes be very useful. But focus-shift killed it!
Unless Canon fixes this issue, I'll keep using my EF version.


----------



## Del Paso (Oct 15, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> That's a weird reply from Canon, focus-shift is something the firmware could very well compensate for since it knows the actual position of the focus motors and hence the exact focus distance.
> And did Canon just imply that their AF should be avoided?


Wonderful new world, an AF lens that shall be used in manual mode if you need sharp pictures...


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 17, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Bryan @ TDP posted the information he received from Canon's engineers:
> 
> "_...due to its 1.4x magnification (1.4:1 reproduction ratio) capability, a magnification far exceeding 1.0x, the RF 100mm F2.8 L Macro IS Lens's optical design exhibits some focus shift.
> 
> ...


Is the focus shift Canon is acknowledging at all magnifications or only when the lens is above 1:1 and approaching 1.4x magnification?
If given the choice between a lens limited to 1x and no focus breathing or a lens that goes to 1.4x but has focus breathing through the entire range, I think many would choose the former. It seems weird to introduce a lens that has a special feature that compromises the utility of the lens for the whole range, not just when the feature is being used.
Hopefully they will address it as much as feasible in firmware in spite of this statement.


----------



## stevelee (Oct 17, 2021)

At macro levels, the focus mostly a matter of choosing magnification. So if I am using a tripod, I use the focus dial for setting size, and the rail to focus. The added bonus (besides not driving one’s self crazy) is you are already set up to do focus stacking if you want it.

Chasing around insects is a whole ‘nother matter. Even then I have better luck moving the camera to focus rather than twisting a dial. And if someone can do that at 1.4x, he’s a better man than I.


----------



## Viggo (Oct 18, 2021)

stevelee said:


> At macro levels, the focus mostly a matter of choosing magnification. So if I am using a tripod, I use the focus dial for setting size, and the rail to focus. The added bonus (besides not driving one’s self crazy) is you are already set up to do focus stacking if you want it.
> 
> Chasing around insects is a whole ‘nother matter. Even then I have better luck moving the camera to focus rather than twisting a dial. And if someone can do that at 1.4x, he’s a better man than I.


Focus shift makes no difference in MF or AF, it happens as the aperture closes during exposure, so it will still be a problem. Not sure if you can use dof-preview and dial in focus based on that preview.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 18, 2021)

Viggo said:


> Focus shift makes no difference in MF or AF, it happens as the aperture closes during exposure, so it will still be a problem. Not sure if you can use dof-preview and dial in focus based on that preview.


Correct. If you’re shooting at f/2.8 (with macro, unlikely), there’s no focus shift. If you stop down, there will be backfocus that goes away narrower than ~f/11, because at that point the DoF is sufficiently deep to encompass the backfocus. So if you usually shoot at f/14, focus shift is a non-issue. If you focus stack it’s also a non-issue even if you shoot wider than f/11 to avoid any softening from diffraction, provided you collect a deep enough stack.


----------



## stevelee (Oct 18, 2021)

Viggo said:


> Focus shift makes no difference in MF or AF, it happens as the aperture closes during exposure, so it will still be a problem. Not sure if you can use dof-preview and dial in focus based on that preview.


Yes,I realized later that my post somewhat missed the point. Otherwise, I meant what I said, for what that’s worth. I’ve never experienced focus shift as far as I could tell in macro situations, so it is not something I related to. I would think DOF preview should help on a mirrorless camera. On my DSLR, looking through a glass darkly is not likely to tell me much.


----------



## leadin2 (Nov 14, 2021)

I used f/5.6 and f/8 with auto focus quite often, so EF L will stay with me longer. =)


----------

