100 macro, L or non L?

Started Oct 19, 2012 | Discussions thread
Dinsy Forum Member • Posts: 79
Re: DPReview review of L

happysnapper64 wrote:

trulandphoto wrote:

The review discusses the two lenses.


Trulandphoto. Thank's for the link. I have decided to keep my non L, as the benefit of the IS, which is important to me, seems to be minimal. I am currently looking to up-grade my tripod, & think I would benefit more from that right now. Thank's for your efforts. Much appreciated.

-- hide signature --

lee uk.
There are old pilots, & there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.

I think you've made a sensible decision. I have the 100mm L IS, and I love it for its refined way with contrast, its creamy bokeh and its 4 stop IS for distance shots, but for close-ups the IS is really not worth upgrading for. The reviews I've read say you get only around 1 stop from it. If you've got the 100mm non-L, use it! Commit yourself to it! I've got back problems too, and so I use a tripod where I can with remote trigger and manual focus. Very rarely do I get any huge benefit for macro work from the IS.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow