100 Macro as non-Macro

[Chris]

Being a poor college student I am looking at using some hard-earned birthday cash toward a new lens, and I'm considering either the 85 1.8 or 100 2.8 Macro. I'd really like to get the Macro, but my question is how versatile would it be? I'm wondering how able is in in everyday shooting, such as a portraits lens, or possibly even sports photography on campus here? I'm thinking basketball, is the AF on it decent for moving targets and such? I know the 85 excells at both, but I'd love to have a true macro lens if I could.

ChRis

[ohenry]

The 100mm f/2.8 macro performs well as a normal lens. It is sharp and the USM is fast and quiet. I don't think 100mm is a good focal length for sports photography, however. It will work, but your subjects will need to be close.

[Kevin Barrett]

The 100 Macro is a very flexible lens and totally up for portrait duty. Awesome bokeh etc.
However, I think the 85 f1.8 is a faster focusing lens and more suited to fast action.

The 100 is really nice, but it has a much wider focus range to cover. The distance switch
helps to improve the speed, but I still think the 85 f/1.8 would be better in a sports application.

I suppose you'll have to decide whether you like macros or sports shooting better...

[Narsuitus]

Since both focal lengths can be used for portraits and since both lenses can be used for sports (at least the sports where you are close to the action such as courtside basketball and ringside boxing), it really depends on what you need more—the macro feature of the 100mm or the light gathering speed of the 85mm.

[rpcrowe]

I have purchased a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 SP AF Macro lens (not the DI model) for less than $225 on Ebay (including postage). It has turned out to be an excellent macro and general purpose lens and competes very well with the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro. In fact in some categories, the Tamron surpasses the Canon... although in most categories, they are a dead heat.

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/can-tam-macro/

The purchase price wasn't a fluke. These Tamron lenses usually sell in the neighborhood of $200-225 Used.

The lens has beautiful bokeh and has been called the "Macro Portrait Lens". It is easy and fun to use and the images appear to be extremelt sharp and crisp.

I am still getting acquainted with all the facets of this lens. It has been many years since I owned a dedicated macro lens. I have seen some absolutely wonderful macro images shot with this lens.

The reason I posted this is to let you know that there are other viable options than the Canon 100mm macro.

[Kevin Barrett]

Originally Posted by rpcrowe

I have purchased a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 SP AF Macro lens (not the DI model) for less than $225 on Ebay (including postage). It has turned out to be an excellent macro and general purpose lens and competes very well with the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro. In fact in some categories, the Tamron surpasses the Canon... although in most categories, they are a dead heat.

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/can-tam-macro/

The purchase price wasn't a fluke. These Tamron lenses usually sell in the neighborhood of $200-225 Used.

The lens has beautiful bokeh and has been called the "Macro Portrait Lens". It is easy and fun to use and the images appear to be extremelt sharp and crisp.

I am still getting acquainted with all the facets of this lens. It has been many years since I owned a dedicated macro lens. I have seen some absolutely wonderful macro images shot with this lens.

The reason I posted this is to let you know that there are other viable options than the Canon 100mm macro.

Congrats on your purchase. It sounds like you've got a great copy. Post some results!

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by Chris

Being a poor college student I am looking at using some hard-earned birthday cash toward a new lens, and I'm considering either the 85 1.8 or 100 2.8 Macro. I'd really like to get the Macro, but my question is how versatile would it be?

Chris, you'll ultimately want both of these lenses, I think. I know I consider both indispensible, but if I were to have to choose one, it would be the 85 1.8, simply because it's smaller and as a walkaround lens, it's better, since it's easier to handhold without inducing camera shake. The 100mm macro is too long on 1.6x cameras, I think, for handholding.

The 1.8 *does not* focus close, however. That's a downside. They're really not interchangable at all.