Photo quality from Canon 70-200 mm. f/2.8L and Canon 100 mm. f/2.8 macro

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Camera Equipment : One Thread

I was thinking to myself and didn't really know the answer as to the following questions. I was wondering about the QUALITY of photos taken from Canon 70-200 mm. f/2.8L (shoot at 100 mm.) and of those taken from Canon 100 mm. f/2.8 macro. Is it fair to do the comparison? I thought L lens might be able to compare with non-L somehow (well, I know from all those threads that the 100 mm. macro is super sharp) Thank you for all the responses.

-- Watha Suteesopon (suteesop@uiuc.edu), April 15, 2000

Answers

I own both the 70-200/2.8L and the older 100/2.8 (non-USM) macro, and in the hands (or on the tripod) of a skilled photographer, both are marvelous lenses. When used as a general purpose 100mm lens, the macro is, IMO, a bit sharper than the L zoom at the 100mm position, but here one may really be trying to compare apples and oranges. Remember that L series lenses (either fixed or zoom) are not necessarily ALWAYS sharper than their non-L counterparts (especially when the non-L lens is a fine macro like the 100/2.8). A photographer may choose an L lens over a non-L lens of same or similar focal length because the L lens will often be faster and more ruggedly constructed, as well as perhaps for the apochromatic properties of the L lens.

-- kurt heintzelman (heintzelman.1@osu.edu), April 16, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ