Canon macro 100mm line8/1/2023 ![]() That was an update over the 1991 non-USM EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro and still a highlight Sigma’s 17-70Macro and 18-300Macro doesn’t take this control as seriously. At the center barrel the manual focusing ring is generous at about 3.6cm and nearly completely rubberized, smooth to the touch and offering the excellent full-time manual operation: at any moment one can adjust the ring even with the auto-focus motor set to AF, faster to precisely focus on any subject. At the rear a fixed 5.5cm area houses the top distance window and side control panel, together with an optional tripod collar model B(B), all within fingers reach. ![]() It didn’t have to be this thick: the first and last optical elements are certainly smaller than the overall outer barrel, and it’s clear Canon’s intention at making it larger to fit our hands, balanced with the camera. In your hands the ergonomics are pleasing for those born with longer fingers, once everything feels robust. So the simpler 100mm f/2.8 USM is an easy recommendation: opt for the more expensive L version if you must use its built-in stabilizer (nice for video recording) and weather resistance or make peace with the cheaper alternative, that works just as well. What’s important is its solidness and lightness paired with a scratch-resistant external barrel and all-internal focusing mechanism, clearly meant for the professional market just like the identical L series both work well for amateurs as well. A “problem” plaguing some very important lenses on Canon’s lineup, this design uses different steps to separate both handling and adjustments zones, distinct from newer streamlined lenses that are more comfortable to use despite being very robust and easy to use. If you don't absolutely need IS/VC for your uses, the Canon non IS is always an excellent choice.At 7.9 x 11.9cm of 600g of mostly plastic, rubbers and glass, the first thing we notice on the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM is its “old school” design we can’t deny its 18-years on the EF lineup. If you absolutely need IS/VC then I would compare the Canon IS to the Tamron VC instead for a more fair comparison. Overall, the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro Lens is one of the sharpest and most economical choices found in the entire Canon lineup. How useful is image stabilization in a macro lens? Image stabilization is available in the more expensive versions of the lenses from both manufacturers, and I encourage you to read the following for advice on that topic: They will all should be generally sharp and excellent for both portraits at that focal length and macro work. So yes you can use the Tamron with stabilization, but if the image even on a tripod is not as sharp, is that worth it to you? I would choose the sharpest lens then consider stabilization as a secondary thought, but that is just an opinion. ![]() It is very obvious how much higher quality the Canon is at f/2.8. This is probably my favorite comparison of the two lenses that you mentioned, the VC Tamron and the Non-IS Canon at. Tamron SP 90mm F/2.8 Di MACRO 1:1 VC USD CanonĪs you can see based on that spec comparison, they are all very similar but the Canon 100mm L macro stands out from the crowd.Here is a comparison of the following three lenses at DxOMark: You can use online tools to compare both of these lenses as well as the very comparable Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS L USM lens.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |