Canon EF 100 mm f2.8 macro. Anyone use this?

4 replies [Last post]
rongrover
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2002

Hi. I am off to New York very soon and while there a visit to BH Photo will be a must. Obviously I will want to take avantage of the very good prices and thought I would get a lens for my Canon 300D.

I am now mainly involved with Portrait work both in my home studio (now fully set-up with Elinchrom equipment) and also out of doors. For studio work at present I just use the 50mm 1.8 and it is very good, but as I will now also be doing quite a lot of Fashion/glamour outside feel I need something else.

I was advised to get the 85mm 1.8 usm, but after reading some very good reports about the 100mm 2.8 macro usm, I thought this may be the best way to go. ie just that bit extra length and the macro facility, especially as I also have a light tent for very small close up work.

But my main interest is for portraits including full length and wondered if anyone had used this or can add views about it. Cost wise, in the uk it is almost £400, in the states almost half that.

Any advice most welcome.
All the best, Ron.

Stuart B-M
Offline
Joined: Apr 6 2001

Ron,
I have the 100mm 2.8macro, and indeed is a fine lens, the only problem with portrait is that it may be rather too good...

If the subject is at there best fine, it will work well, however like a mirror, it will capture everything it see's.

Primes, are also a very good bet for this type of photography, personally i keep the 100mm in the bag but use the 24-70L

Kind Regards
Stuart

rongrover
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2002

Thanks for reply Stuart. First about the 24-70 L at around the £900+ mark I really at this stage could not justify the cost. Maybe this time next year, or if the models do very well and I get my commision, then maybe!

Regarding the quality of the 100 2.8 macro, the more detail it can show the better. If the people I am going to be working with cannot stand up to detail, I feel they should not be in the fashion/glamour field of work. But I take your point. Sometimes they do use their own makeup personel especially if the assignment has been requested by a third party and I have to rely on them to know what is best for photographic work.

However, most will not be like that as they are just trying to get started. Makeup is very important. I do have a friend who has only just qualified and she helps me with this aspect to gain more experience.

As you don't seem to use the 100mm 2.8 macro have you thought about selling it? if so, what would be your best lowest price? email me on this if you wish.

Thanks and all the best, Ron.

Stuart B-M
Offline
Joined: Apr 6 2001

Dear Ron,
I use the macro, but not for Portrait work, i use it for closeups, mainly plant/insects... it has a place in my set up, just not really for what you suggest,

However it does not make it a bad lens for portrait work, in fact as i have mentioned is very good,
Still think if you are in the market, the 85mm is best....

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=31&sort=7&cat=2&page=1

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=47&sort=7&cat=2&page=3

Kind Regards....

rongrover
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2002

Thanks again Stuart. The links were of real value to me and will not have to hunt around anymore for such information.

After reading all the reports on the 100mm 2.8 macro, it seems a great lens for Portraits and even as a general purpose lens for landscapes. and obviously macro.

I also had a look at the 85mm 1.8 (cannot aford the one you said) and this also had very good reports, so manybe if the price is right, will get both, in New York!!

All the best, Ron.