Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro also good for portraits?

[Phrasikleia]

I looked this lens up on PixelPeeper and was surprised to find so few portraits taken with it. In fact, I found only two, and neither of them were particularly good. Is this just a coincidence, or is this lens really best used for its macro capability?

 

[Westside guy]

That might have more to do with its focal length - especially when paired with a 1.6x sensor.

 

[Phrasikleia]

That might have more to do with its focal length - especially when paired with a 1.6x sensor.

Well, when I look at some of the slightly longer focal lengths on 1.6X sensors, I see lots of portraits. Maybe the people who generally buy macro lenses have little interest in portraiture. :::shrug:::

 

[jake-g]

I love my 60mm nikkor micro for portraits. But I believe 100mm is too long for this work.

 

[wheelhot]

My father bought the USM version and looking through the lens, the image looks really clear compared to the Tamron he bought. He don't use the lens for photography, he used it for something else. (this is the reason why I opt for Canon for my first DSLR and why I ask about lens in my previous thread)

Anyway, I checked some picture and they say the 100mm is ideal for both macro and portrait, if you want a serious Macro then go for the shorter one, I forgot why will you want a 140mm.

I love this picture taken by the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
Picture 1
Picture 2

 

[Qwest905]

the 100mm macro is awesome for portrait
you will find this lens is ridiculously sharp even a 1.6 crop camera

the drawback of this lens is it's slow focusing

here's one i took when i had a crop camera and the 100mm

 

[dllavaneras]

the 100mm macro is awesome for portrait
you will find this lens is ridiculously sharp even a 1.6 crop camera

I agree, it's sharp, very sharp!

I happened to take a portrait today with this lens:

 

[Phrasikleia]

Thanks for the helpful replies! I was torn between the 100mm f/2.8 macro and the 100mm f/2. When I saw the latter on Craigslist with a hood for $300, that settled that quandary right away.

Here's my first "portrait" with it:

^^This guy and his son are looking a little gaunt, but that's no fault of the lens!

 

[luminosity]

I'm a Nikon D300 owner, rather than a Canon, but my 60mm macro lens is very sharp for portraits.

 

[synth3tik]

I use a Nikon 85mm AI as a default portrait lens. I borrowed a 135mm from a friend and found with the 1.6x sensor that it was a little much. I usually got between my 85mm and 50mm, and if a subject is comfortable enough I go for my 24mm.

 

[Qwest905]

lucky you for finding a 100mm f2....they are so hard to find

i'd love to trade my 85mm f1.8 for one =)

 

[Eauboy]

He don't use the lens for photography, he used it for something else.

Very curious what other uses besides photography one might find for a lens.

 

[ChrisA]

I looked this lens up on PixelPeeper and was surprised to find so few portraits taken with it. In fact, I found only two, and neither of them were particularly good. Is this just a coincidence, or is this lens really best used for its macro capability?

100mm is a very long lens on a body with a 1.6X "crop". You need a large room to do the portraits. And then think about lighting -- the lights get harsher as you pull them back. I have an 85mm and it's about as long as I'd want to use. the 50mm works in a smaller space

 

[Phrasikleia]

100mm is a very long lens on a body with a 1.6X "crop". You need a large room to do the portraits. And then think about lighting -- the lights get harsher as you pull them back. I have an 85mm and it's about as long as I'd want to use. the 50mm works in a smaller space

I won't be using it for that kind of portraiture. I needed something a bit longer for outdoors and for large spaces where I need as much bokeh as I can get. I already have a 50mm for smaller spaces.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

I love my 60mm nikkor micro for portraits. But I believe 100mm is too long for this work.

A lot of photographers use the EF 100mm Canon lens for portraiture, as well as the EF 135mm. No idea why, but that's what I read at a very popular Canon forum. I have one, but only use it for macro and outdoors photography. It works very well with teleconverters. I imagine that such a lens would work well for daylight/shade head-shots at a distance.

 

[wheelhot]

Very curious what other uses besides photography one might find for a lens.

Well he use it for some kind of visioning.


So besides macro and portraits, what else can I use this lens for? I assume it will be fine for scenery pics? How about fast moving objects?

 

[Kebabselector]

How about fast moving objects?

It's not that fast at focusing (well mine isn't), so I'd say no.

 

[wheelhot]

Aah okay, thanks for the info, expected that a macro lens won't be able to capture fast moving objects.

Well at least when I get my 1000D, I would be able to use my dad 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens for most of my photography which involves non-moving objects and macros.

I do hope in the future my photography skills will grow beyond static object and capture good fast moving objects. I always wanted to do the motion blur effect, but my PnS cannot do that

 

[Phrasikleia]

It's not that fast at focusing (well mine isn't), so I'd say no.

If that's true for all of them, then I'm all the more glad I didn't go for the macro version. My 100mm f/2 is very fast at focusing. I'm also enjoying the extra speed with the larger aperture. It's also very sharp:

http://www.megethos.com/Phrasikleia/WhiteFlowers.jpg

That's a full-size image, so I'll just include the URL here so the photo doesn't make the thread load too slowly. I took that photo on a breezy day and was surprised I got such a sharp shot of a swaying branch.

Shot at f/2.2, so the DOF is super thin, but it picked up some terrific texture in the white petals.

 

[wheelhot]

Oo, here is a very good site on the different type of lens out there. Thanks to whoever posted the URL

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/167-canon-ef-100mm-f28-usm-macro-test-report--review