100 macro, L or non L?

Started Oct 19, 2012 | Discussions thread
rickpoole
Contributing MemberPosts: 664Gear list
Like?
Re: 100 macro, L or non L?
In reply to Hank3152, Oct 19, 2012

Hank3152 wrote:

Hi Lee,

I felt that the newer L has a much faster AF and the optics provide better color and contrast. Some may not think the price difference is worth it but that would depend on your criteria......for me it was.

Here are more owner's reviews, many of which are from prior v.1 non-L users........
 http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=384&sort=7&cat=2&page=1

I'll second everything Hank said...I started comparing the L and non-L earlier this year and decided the only way to know for sure was to try both.  My local camera store let me borrow both for a few hours to try them in various situations.  It only took 10-20 minutes to know the L was worth the extra money.  Same reasons Hank pointed out - very fast AF, better color rendition, better contrast and the IS allows handheld shots that are just not possible with the non-L version.  I also looked at used prices and the L version holds its value quite a bit better than the non-L version.

 rickpoole's gear list:rickpoole's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow