What's in your camera bag?

Cmike2780 · 01-02-2013, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TreeSemdyZee

Looking for opinions from the Canon guys. I've got the hankering for macro lens and am trying to decide between the 180mm 3.5 and the 100mm 2.8. Both have pretty amazing MTF charts and I like the new technology in the 100. Any opinions or experience with either?

Not a Canon user but can shed some insight. If you have a crop sensor camera, the 100mm has enough reach for most macro stuff and can double as a great portrait lens. The 180mm is gonna give you the reach if you plan on taking pics of tiny insects from a greater working distance. I wouldn't worry to much about image stabilization or Auto Focus tech since macro work is easier if done manually. The 3.5 vs 2.8 isn't much of a difference since it becomes razor thin. Truthfully, the 100mm is more than enough....but it really depends on what you shoot and what you shoot with. You could always add extension tubes.

didymus · 01-06-2013, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cmike2780

Not a Canon user but can shed some insight. If you have a crop sensor camera, the 100mm has enough reach for most macro stuff and can double as a great portrait lens. The 180mm is gonna give you the reach if you plan on taking pics of tiny insects from a greater working distance. I wouldn't worry to much about image stabilization or Auto Focus tech since macro work is easier if done manually. The 3.5 vs 2.8 isn't much of a difference since it becomes razor thin. Truthfully, the 100mm is more than enough....but it really depends on what you shoot and what you shoot with. You could always add extension tubes.

I have the old 100mm. Agree this is long enough mostly, on a crop body. If full frame would want the 180. I have done a lot of macro work. I disagree that IS isn't useful, could be very helpful. Both great lenses. Agree that 2.8 isn't a useful aperture if actually shooting macro subjects. But can make for a nice portrait lens

Cmike2780 · 01-06-2013, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by didymus

I have the old 100mm. Agree this is long enough mostly, on a crop body. If full frame would want the 180. I have done a lot of macro work. I disagree that IS isn't useful, could be very helpful. Both great lenses. Agree that 2.8 isn't a useful aperture if actually shooting macro subjects. But can make for a nice portrait lens

I meant for macro work. IS isn't really useful since you're more than likely using a smaller apertures, a tripod and strobes. If you're gonna use it as a portrait lens, then yes, it does help.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New camera	Rone	Photography	3	12-11-2011 01:33 AM
Anyone has a car camera?	zmyride	Nissan 370Z General Discussions	2	04-26-2011 06:44 PM
Need a camera	phelan	Southern California Region	4	03-23-2010 10:21 AM