I want a Macro lens but do I need it?

[acr0p0ra]

Hey everyone,
I'm thinking about getting a new lens and have been considering a 100mm macro 2.8 Canon to go with my canon XS. I would like to take macro shots, but this is going to be my only lens other then the kit 18-55. I want to be able to use the lens for other things too like shooting outdoors, sport events, and other things that a most people would use their SLR for. Am I going to regret getting the 100mm macro? I can not afford to get the IS version of the lens so I'm concerned that this lens isnt going to be great for 'everyday' type shooting. I know tamron makes some zoom 'macro' lenses that dont do 1:1 but would I better off getting something like this rather then the canon 100mm?
Thanks for the input and advice.
Brian

 

[Reef Pets]

If you want quality macro photos then you will want to get a macro lens, the 100mm canon lens is awesome and can be used for outdoor photos as well.

 

[STL]

Macros are great fun to play with. In addition to the coral macros, I use mine for long shots of the kids. A f2.8 is a pretty fast lens (lets in lots of light), the lack of IS can be overcome by using faster shutter speeds/higher ISO. You're going to want to use a tri-pod for the macro shots anyway, so the IS is pretty useless for those.

 

[CJO]

Macro lenses are great portrait lenses as well. However, they don't do very well for sports (you'd want a higher-powered zoom) or landscape (your 18-55 would probably work well for this).

CJ

 

[ToXIc]

go for broke and get the 100mm...

 

[returnofsid]

The Canon 100mm Macro, NON IS, will be an incredible Macro lens, AND Portraiture lens. I use my 100mm Macro for portraiture photography A LOT. For sports and as a general lens, it won't work so well as you'll be stuck at 100mm so you'll need to move yourself closer or further away from the object, instead of being able to zoom in and out. The "Zoom Macros" such as the Tamron 70-300 or Canon 75-300 are garbage though. I had the Tamron 70-300 "Macro" and after using it initially when I purchaed it, I put it away and barely ever used it. As an inexpensive "all around lens" you might look at the Canon 18-200IS. I use mine a lot and they're fairly inexpensive.

 

[brahm]

I've had the 100mm marco lens for some time now. It's by far my least use lens over all. It was fun at first.. macros of everything! Then I got over it haha. Every once in a while I dig it out to take some photos, but it's like my fish eye I try to limit it's usage or I end up feeling "gimmicky." Granted I'm glad that I have it, because when I want to use it I enjoy it, but if it was between that lens and any of the other lenses I use more commonly it wouldn't be my first choice. Also it's a really slow focusing lens which makes it useless for sports.

(I mostly shot skiing, snowmobiling, snowboarding, skateboarding, and motocross).

With that said.. It's a really sharp prime and does take some nice shots for non-L glass.

 

[returnofsid]

brahm, if you're having issues with the Canon 100mm Macro, focusing slowly, I'd suggest possibly having it looked at. Typically, they're a very fast focusing lens, mine included. The only time I have issues with it focusing is when I'm taking VERY CLOSE macro shots, hand holding or when shooting macro of moving objects such as insects or flowers that are moving due to wind. The focus issue isn't with the lens, it's with me holding still when attempting to focus so closely, hand holding. I've used several L series lenses and my non L 100mm Macro generally focuses as quickly or quicker than any of them. When shooting portraiture, I use the 100mm Macro about 90% of the time, using my Nifty Fifty the remainder of the time. Never had any issues with slow focusing.

 

[brahm]

brahm, if you're having issues with the Canon 100mm Macro, focusing slowly, I'd suggest possibly having it looked at. Typically, they're a very fast focusing lens, mine included. The only time I have issues with it focusing is when I'm taking VERY CLOSE macro shots, hand holding or when shooting macro of moving objects such as insects or flowers that are moving due to wind. The focus issue isn't with the lens, it's with me holding still when attempting to focus so closely, hand holding. I've used several L series lenses and my non L 100mm Macro generally focuses as quickly or quicker than any of them. When shooting portraiture, I use the 100mm Macro about 90% of the time, using my Nifty Fifty the remainder of the time. Never had any issues with slow focusing.

It's in tip top shape, I take all my gear to Canon every couple seasons to have them serviced. I've used it side by side with my 70-200mm 2.8L IS, and my 24-70 2.8L both are much faster focusing in my experience when shooting AS.

Just to be clear we are talking about the standard "Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro", not the "Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens"

 

[wish]

I rented some lenses at my local Camera store before I got one!

 

[dgiglio3087]

brahm, if you're having issues with the Canon 100mm Macro, focusing slowly, I'd suggest possibly having it looked at. Typically, they're a very fast focusing lens, mine included. The only time I have issues with it focusing is when I'm taking VERY CLOSE macro shots, hand holding or when shooting macro of moving objects such as insects or flowers that are moving due to wind. The focus issue isn't with the lens, it's with me holding still when attempting to focus so closely, hand holding. I've used several L series lenses and my non L 100mm Macro generally focuses as quickly or quicker than any of them. When shooting portraiture, I use the 100mm Macro about 90% of the time, using my Nifty Fifty the remainder of the time. Never had any issues with slow focusing.

x2 mine is super quick