Slickdeals.net

Slickdeals.net (http://slickdeals.net/forums/index.php)
-   Deal Talk (http://slickdeals.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens $779 + Free Shipping (http://slickdeals.net/e/6000854-canon-ef-100mm-f-2-8l-macro-is-usm-lens-779-free-shipping)

DJ3xclusive 05-01-2013 09:00 AM

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens $779 + Free Shipping
 
1 Attachment(s)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-...4d0c30f98d

brisar 05-01-2013 09:00 AM

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens $779 + Free Shipping
 
1 Attachment(s)
BuyDig via eBay has Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens for $779 with Free Shipping. Thanks DJ3xclusive

fyu 05-01-2013 09:01 AM

nice.
sweet price.

leoninto 05-01-2013 09:08 AM

Good price. No tax to NY.

haojiang 05-01-2013 09:09 AM

Very good price for this lense

- sent by iPhone App FlipDeals -

notaxstate 05-01-2013 09:12 AM

1...2...3 FP. Almost as good as refurbished price... Lowest I can recollect from authorized seller.

Probably can sell your out of warranty lens and get this for no net loss/gain. Also $15 eBay bucks. Also great for portraits, but 135L is better.

azn3386 05-01-2013 09:13 AM

in for one. I was on the fence when it was 714 refurbed from canon + tax would have been ~ 775. 779 new is a steal ! I see this lens on Craigslist used for ~ 800 bucks

pnaldi 05-01-2013 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azn3386 (Post 59189110)
in for one. I was on the fence when it was 714 refurbed from canon + tax would have been ~ 775. 779 new is a steal ! I see this lens on Craigslist used for ~ 800 bucks

was just about to say the exact same thing

nice deal

ninjarobert 05-01-2013 09:19 AM

Thanks OP! I've wanted this lens for a long time. Finally, a good deal. Glad I didn't bite on the rebate with printer package.

DJ3xclusive 05-01-2013 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fyu (Post 59188772)
nice.
sweet price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59189082)
1...2...3 FP. Almost as good as refurbished price... Lowest I can recollect from authorized seller.

Probably can sell your out of warranty lens and get this for no net loss/gain. Also $15 eBay bucks. Also great for portraits, but 135L is better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by azn3386 (Post 59189110)
in for one. I was on the fence when it was 714 refurbed from canon + tax would have been ~ 775. 779 new is a steal ! I see this lens on Craigslist used for ~ 800 bucks

Quote:

Originally Posted by pnaldi (Post 59189150)
was just about to say the exact same thing

nice deal

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninjarobert (Post 59189316)
Thanks OP! I've wanted this lens for a long time. Finally, a good deal. Glad I didn't bite on the rebate with printer package.

yw guys :cheers: :D

PerlAddict 05-01-2013 09:24 AM

Wish this price could have come back before Christmas. I don't have the funds for it now. *sigh* What a lovely lens.

enraginangel 05-01-2013 09:25 AM

I wish I made more money...After playing with some extension tubes, I really want a true macro lens. Macro is seriously the most fun you can have with the most mundane things.

gmaz 05-01-2013 09:27 AM

Oh it hurts to see this. I bought one in December and paid 899 for it. I love the lends though so it doesn't hurt to much. Its well worth the price. Now I just need to get a full frame camera body to replace my 1.6 crop but that is a ways off.

575rider 05-01-2013 09:28 AM

Only cheaper ONCE as far as I remember, and that was through J&R on Ebay (was $772 after coupon). Fantastic lens. Fantastic price. :thumbsup:

Daddyofthree 05-01-2013 09:34 AM

I have this lens and I love it. Perfect for portraits also.

mgamer20o0 05-01-2013 09:34 AM

very nice. i have the normal one but been wanting the l.

fixindan 05-01-2013 09:35 AM

Got one. First time I've personally seen it under $800. Beats buying this used for $800 on CL where I live.

sjain204 05-01-2013 09:37 AM

Will BestBuy price match this? I cannot pay in full. Would love to use their 18 month financing. o_0

SlickLegacy 05-01-2013 09:38 AM

would rather have the 135L

stevedola 05-01-2013 09:40 AM

oh man, Ive wanted this lens and but havent wanted to spend 899. so I was resigned to find a used or refurb non L version for around 400-450. Is the L version that much better ? is it worth the addtion 350?

fyu 05-01-2013 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevedola (Post 59189868)
oh man, Ive wanted this lens and but havent wanted to spend 899. so I was resigned to find a used or refurb non L version for around 400-450. Is the L version that much better ? is it worth the addtion 350?

only if you want IS, which is helpful for hand holding.

so if you're doing serious macro work with ring flashes and focusing rails, there is very little incentive to upgrade.
might as well as get the 180mm.


but, if you know how to resell, then you can get this lens, and then sell it later for little to no loss.

kevin300z 05-01-2013 09:42 AM

I got this
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/...UTF8&psc=1
instead for my nikon (probably have same one for canon) with these results:
http://s22.postimg.org/qup3a7xsw/DSC_0490.jpg
http://s11.postimg.org/mnr2dmr0i/DSC_0504.jpg

ClownBaby 05-01-2013 09:43 AM

100mm prime and macro? Talk about a very limiting lens.

Handonam 05-01-2013 09:44 AM

holy crap, so many slickdeals on canon lenses. I'm still trying to wait for a body deal to jump on :(

fyu 05-01-2013 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Handonam (Post 59189992)
holy crap, so many slickdeals on canon lenses. I'm still trying to wait for a body deal to jump on :(

you're taking the lenses before bodies too far.

575rider 05-01-2013 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClownBaby (Post 59189954)
100mm prime and macro? Talk about a very limiting lens.


No, not really. Also great for portraits. Even used it for soccer with great results.

bokeh 05-01-2013 09:46 AM

how does it compare to this? http://www.adorama.com/TN100PEOS....flaid62905

another slickdeal posted today. no OS/IS but half the price. you're usually using a tripod, right?

i want to jump on one of these. already have 24-105 and 70-200 f4 so do like L quality.

haterrny 05-01-2013 09:47 AM

Got one slick price

godlyatheist 05-01-2013 09:48 AM

So does BuyDig put one prime lens on sale every day?

MsticAzn 05-01-2013 09:53 AM

just called them, they said they are OOS

kaleido 05-01-2013 09:54 AM

Great lens, the macro on this comes in very handy. I use if for all of my pet photography.

Hydraridaz 05-01-2013 09:58 AM

how is this compare to 70-200mm F4 L lens? i bought it... omfg with the money that i dont have....

andromeda3 05-01-2013 10:00 AM

Could someone let me know in a few sentences - why this lens is called a macro even though it is 100mm. And why this lens is so expensive?
Also I assume that a 'prime lens' is a fixed lens(not a zoom) and it produces very sharp pictures.

ClownBaby 05-01-2013 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hydraridaz (Post 59190344)
how is this compare to 70-200mm F4 L lens? i bought it... omfg with the money that i dont have....

A zoom versus a prime macro? These aren't even comparable. You should think about what you need a lens for and then find a lens that fits those parameters.

graure 05-01-2013 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by enraginangel (Post 59189450)
I wish I made more money...After playing with some extension tubes, I really want a true macro lens. Macro is seriously the most fun you can have with the most mundane things.

You should have bought this lens last week, it was just over $700 then.
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/..._340725_-1

Hydraridaz 05-01-2013 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClownBaby (Post 59190388)
A zoom versus a prime macro? These aren't even comparable. You should think about what you need a lens for and then find a lens that fits those parameters.

i mean about image quality wide, would the max zoom at 200mm of 70-200L lens as clear and crisp as the 100mm prime???
i dont mind take the shot that i want then crop it as needed... i want some telephoto lens so i can take some birds images without getting too close to them.

b534202 05-01-2013 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59189082)
1...2...3 FP. Almost as good as refurbished price... Lowest I can recollect from authorized seller.

Probably can sell your out of warranty lens and get this for no net loss/gain. Also $15 eBay bucks. Also great for portraits, but 135L is better.

Exactly what I'm doing. I'm going to sell my Canon refurb.


Quote:

Originally Posted by godlyatheist (Post 59190082)
So does BuyDig put one prime lens on sale every day?

They're becoming my favorite seller!

ClownBaby 05-01-2013 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hydraridaz (Post 59190596)
i mean about image quality wide, would the max zoom at 200mm of 70-200L lens as clear and crisp as the 100mm prime???
i dont mind take the shot that i want then crop it as needed... i want some telephoto lens so i can take some birds images without getting too close to them.

If you are shooting a moving object, I would much rather have the 70-200L. I have a 70-200F4L and love it. For birding, you're probably going to even need more reach than 200mm.

This 100mm F2.8L is really for macro photography IMO and you need to have a need and/or desire for L glass. The 100mm F2 is like $400 or so and it's a very good lens...it's faster but not an L and it's not macro.

synikster 05-01-2013 10:19 AM

Bought, thanks.

Engin33r 05-01-2013 10:25 AM

In for 1!
 
I'm in for one, thanks! But at the same time, stop tempting me with your deals, I'm going broke, lol.

BeeJayDee 05-01-2013 10:26 AM

Drooling and sobbing at the same time. Great price for a great lens.

MsticAzn 05-01-2013 10:28 AM

anybody having trouble buying from ebay? For some reason it won't let me pay via paypal.

stevenwhitright 05-01-2013 10:33 AM

I also just called and this is sold out. the sales rep on the phone said they will refund my money in a day or so if it doesn't look like they are getting more in stock (and they don't know if and when they will). bummer

nataku00 05-01-2013 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MsticAzn (Post 59191070)
anybody having trouble buying from ebay? For some reason it won't let me pay via paypal.

I checked out with paypal without any issues. I've always wanted this lens after futzing around with a friend's copy for an afternoon, and somehow just justified buying it.

stevenwhitright 05-01-2013 10:34 AM

(i hate when people don't have an accurate representation of their available stock online and sell things they don't have)

Hydraridaz 05-01-2013 10:41 AM

what does it mean by macro lens? i saw the closest focus length is 0.99 feet , is that mean if object 1 feet from me i can still do focus on it and get a macro image?

JoeA4414 05-01-2013 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by enraginangel (Post 59189450)
I wish I made more money...After playing with some extension tubes, I really want a true macro lens. Macro is seriously the most fun you can have with the most mundane things.

You can get the old non-L version for about half this price, and it still renders beautifully, and super sharp. You just don't get IS, which is not necessary since for macro you should be on a tripod anyway.

Amaylin 05-01-2013 10:44 AM

How is this one different than 135mm?

Amaylin 05-01-2013 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeA4414 (Post 59191492)
You can get the old non-L version for about half this price, and it still renders beautifully, and super sharp. You just don't get IS, which is not necessary since for macro you should be on a tripod anyway.


Agree.

azn3386 05-01-2013 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaylin (Post 59191494)
How is this one different than 135mm?

135L is really used as a portrait lens - keep in mind its f/2 but no IS

100mm is a macro lens that can be used as a portrait lens - f/2.8 but has IS

For the definition of macro photography this seems like a good place to start :
http://digital-photography-school...ers-part-1

Amaylin 05-01-2013 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azn3386 (Post 59191652)
135L is really used as a portrait lens - keep in mind its f/2 but no IS

100mm is a macro lens that can be used as a portrait lens - f/2.8 but has IS

For the definition of macro photography this seems like a good place to start :
http://digital-photography-school...ers-part-1

I am not interested in Macro photography. I am scared of insects. That means I'll pass.

azn3386 05-01-2013 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaylin (Post 59191732)
I am not interested in Macro photography. I am scared of insects. That means I'll pass.

doesn't have to be an insects =) Can be a watch or a flower

b534202 05-01-2013 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenwhitright (Post 59191204)
I also just called and this is sold out. the sales rep on the phone said they will refund my money in a day or so if it doesn't look like they are getting more in stock (and they don't know if and when they will). bummer

Stop trolling.

ClownBaby 05-01-2013 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azn3386 (Post 59191758)
doesn't have to be an insects =) Can be a watch or a flower

Sounds super fun. I'll also use it to macro photograph paint drying and grass growing.

microtough 05-01-2013 11:16 AM

anyway, got one!! god damn it, I have to stop from now....

nahpungnome 05-01-2013 11:34 AM

This is a great lens, awesome price for it also. I paid the regular $899 on Amazon, but used my points to get it down to $430. The 180 L macro might be better, but you also pay more for it, roughly $500 more.

As far as the non L vs this one, at macro distances, the IS isn't as helpful as normal distances. That said, I tried macro shots with it on and off, and you can still see the IS working. Image quality for the non L and this one is comparable, but the L is a bit better (mostly for pixel peepers). I love mine, this is a great price.

AkumaX 05-01-2013 11:37 AM

omgosh it'll be $763.xx after ebay bucks.. must hide wallet!!!

nahpungnome 05-01-2013 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nahpungnome (Post 59192684)
This is a great lens, awesome price for it also. I paid the regular $899 on Amazon, but used my points to get it down to $430. The 180 L macro might be better, but you also pay more for it, roughly $500 more.

As far as the non L vs this one, at macro distances, the IS isn't as helpful as normal distances. That said, I tried macro shots with it on and off, and you can still see the IS working. Image quality for the non L and this one is comparable, but the L is a bit better (mostly for pixel peepers). I love mine, this is a great price.

Also forgot to mention, the build is better on the L and you get a lens hood. I don't use my hood at macro distances though since you have to get pretty close to your subject.

bowbei 05-01-2013 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fyu (Post 59189910)
only if you want IS, which is helpful for hand holding.

so if you're doing serious macro work with ring flashes and focusing rails, there is very little incentive to upgrade.
might as well as get the 180mm.


but, if you know how to resell, then you can get this lens, and then sell it later for little to no loss.

This baby is SHARP SHARP SHARP

stevedola 05-01-2013 11:46 AM

just confirmed it will be in stock on friday and orders will be filled and shipped then. in for 1...what the heck! enough drooling over it, I just pulled the trigger and bought the L version. Happy Birthday ME!

radu 05-01-2013 11:51 AM

Why do they always have deals for Canon lenses and not Nikon? grrrrr

stevedola 05-01-2013 12:02 PM

well we all know the reason is that God and slickdeals.net loves Canon and Nikon is the Anti-Christ.

Kaarukun 05-01-2013 12:06 PM

Good deal, wish I had this before I went on my asia trip. Used prices around me are $800+ and limited in supply.

chriskellydev 05-01-2013 12:24 PM

Bleh. Now if only I didn't just tap out my camera budget on a 70-200mm 2.8 IS II. Here's to hoping another one of these deals pops up like...next month.

Serious note though, I have to agree with the other guys in this thread. Macro lens make the most mundane things look epic. And epic things look unreal.

PiratePenguin 05-01-2013 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radu (Post 59193192)
Why do they always have deals for Canon lenses and not Nikon? grrrrr

This is why I jumped ship from nikon.

corazones 05-01-2013 12:25 PM

must exercise fiscal discipline...arghh!!!

azn3386 05-01-2013 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by corazones (Post 59194226)
must exercise fiscal discipline...arghh!!!

DEFICIT SPENDING!! that's the American way!

spicytofu 05-01-2013 12:29 PM

70-200 2.8 IS or this.....

a1strank 05-01-2013 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spicytofu (Post 59194324)
70-200 2.8 IS or this.....

if you don't do macro shots I'd take the 70-200mm over this.

spicytofu 05-01-2013 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a1strank (Post 59195256)
if you don't do macro shots I'd take the 70-200mm over this.

I just want the macro for fun. I dont really do pro macro photography. My f/4 IS is getting boring...

silver00 05-01-2013 01:07 PM

Had to bite. Figure if it starts gathering dust it should be pretty easy to flip and just consider it a rental, but really looking forward to some macro love.

I've got a 5d II and 24-70L, 70-200ISII + 2x extender, and now this.

All I need now is something super-wide angle (16-35L?), or maybe one of the tokina or other primes? Taking recommendations for FF UWA options. :)

notaxstate 05-01-2013 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silver00 (Post 59195348)
Had to bite. Figure if it starts gathering dust it should be pretty easy to flip and just consider it a rental, but really looking forward to some macro love.

I've got a 5d II and 24-70L, 70-200ISII + 2x extender, and now this.

All I need now is something super-wide angle (16-35L?), or maybe one of the tokina or other primes? Taking recommendations for FF UWA options. :)

17-40 is very good UWA. Also 16-35 II UWA is not worth for the price considering not many people would like to shoot landscapes at f/2.8. Good for night shots, but the price is almost double if not more than 17-40. One if the best UWA lens is 10-22, but you don't have crop sensor camera, so it doesn't matter.

Another nice lens is used Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4. It's amazing lens and you could get a used one for $250. They are out of production, but it's pretty good value for money IMHO. Has heavy vignetting and CA wide open, but is gone wide open. Also look at Tokina 17-35 or Sigma 12-24 II. Sigma 12-24 is the widest rectilinear lens available for FF sensor. Also it'll have some distortion issues given the angle on FF.

Also another question to ask yourself is if 24mm on FF wide enough for you ? For most people it is. UWA lenses are for very specific subset of people who want to get into architecture, group and landscape photography. I had used 17-40 and got rid of it as it was spending more time in my bag then on camera.

For primes, look at 14mm II and it's pricey.

Good luck with your search.

Cookie21 05-01-2013 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59189082)
1...2...3 FP. Almost as good as refurbished price... Lowest I can recollect from authorized seller.

Probably can sell your out of warranty lens and get this for no net loss/gain. Also $15 eBay bucks. Also great for portraits, but 135L is better.

don't forget IS ;)

SlickCanon 05-01-2013 01:31 PM

Prices are dropping because the USD to yen ratio increased by 20% in the last 5 months. I expect the price to drop further as Japan's economy collapses.

notaxstate 05-01-2013 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cookie21 (Post 59195680)
don't forget IS ;)

If you have issues shooting 135L f/2 at speeds of atleast 1/250, then you got other issues like technique to worry about first. 135mm is like made for FF lens. 100L ain't slouch, but just can't match 135mm in bokeh considering fast f/2 aperture .

Contrast and sharpness are close, but 135mm's bokeh is just amazing. Also to add that longer the focal length and faster the aperture on FF = better bokeh due to compression.

silver00 05-01-2013 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59195656)
17-40 is very good UWA. Also 16-35 II UWA is not worth for the price considering not many people would like to shoot landscapes at f/2.8. Good for night shots, but the price is almost double if not more than 17-40. One if the best UWA lens is 10-22, but you don't have crop sensor camera, so it doesn't matter.

Another nice lens is used Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4. It's amazing lens and you could get a used one for $250. They are out of production, but it's pretty good value for money IMHO. Has heavy vignetting and CA wide open, but is gone wide open. Also look at Tokina 17-35 or Sigma 12-24 II. Sigma 12-24 is the widest rectilinear lens available for FF sensor. Also it'll have some distortion issues given the angle on FF.

Also another question to ask yourself is if 24mm on FF wide enough for you ? For most people it is. UWA lenses are for very specific subset of people who want to get into architecture, group and landscape photography. I had used 17-40 and got rid of it as it was spending more time in my bag then on camera.

For primes, look at 14mm II and it's pricey.

Good luck with your search.


Cool, thanks. I've shot a lot with the 17-40, and I do think I want something wider than 24, particularly for landscape and indoor real-estate type shooting. Gonna take a look at the Sigma 12-24 and the 14mmII.

radu 05-01-2013 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiratePenguin (Post 59194216)
This is why I jumped ship from nikon.

But I like Nikon products...and would like to wait for a good deal on a lens.

Lark 05-01-2013 02:27 PM

Would it still be great on a cropped sensor?

I can't believe I ordered one.... Spending too much money on lens.

danielfeng 05-01-2013 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gmaz (Post 59189514)
Oh it hurts to see this. I bought one in December and paid 899 for it. I love the lends though so it doesn't hurt to much. Its well worth the price. Now I just need to get a full frame camera body to replace my 1.6 crop but that is a ways off.

I paid more than $1k for this lens back in December 2009 and just used it twice. :lmao:

nataku00 05-01-2013 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lark (Post 59197338)
Would it still be great on a cropped sensor?

I can't believe I ordered one.... Spending too much money on lens.

Bought one to use with my 60D. It'll perform fine on a crop sensor, just that the focal length will be longer, around 160mm for my camera so it may be more difficult to position for macro work.

notaxstate 05-01-2013 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nataku00 (Post 59198370)
Bought one to use with my 60D. It'll perform fine on a crop sensor, just that the focal length will be longer, around 160mm for my camera so it may be more difficult to position for macro work.

Actually 1.6X crop makes it better for macro not worse !

nataku00 05-01-2013 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59198420)
Actually 1.6X crop makes it better for macro not worse !

That's true, looking forward to some crazy zoomed in shots of household items with this lens!

SlickCanon 05-01-2013 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59198420)
Actually 1.6X crop makes it better for macro not worse !

No it doesn't. assuming equal pixel density, you can achieve the exact same shot by cropping the full frame image's center by 1.6x.

notaxstate 05-01-2013 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlickCanon (Post 59198656)
No it doesn't. assuming equal pixel density, you can achieve the exact same shot by cropping the full frame image's center by 1.6x.

Equal pixel density is difficult in real world example. Difficult to actually compose same image between FF and Crop.

Crop has it's own advantages and disadvantages. For anything closer like birding, macro & close ups; crop wins hands down. All I am saying is that crop makes macro better in most if not all situations not worse.

SlickCanon 05-01-2013 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59198882)
Equal pixel density is difficult in real world example. Difficult to actually compose same image between FF and Crop.

Crop has it's own advantages and disadvantages. For anything closer like birding, macro & close ups; crop wins hands down. All I am saying is that crop makes macro better in most if not all situations not worse.

Gotta disagree with you again there. Composing would be easier on FF since you have a 1.6x buffer zone around the subject to play with. On a crop that information is lost forever and cannot be recovered if later you decide you could have framed the shot better. Equal pixel density is a reality, look at Nikon d800 for instance. The only advantage to crop nowadays is that it's cheaper, and perhaps the images being smaller allowing you to fire off more PPS.

erazz61 05-01-2013 05:02 PM

Now if there could just be a 6d deal for $1500 to make me jump from Nikon to Canon, that would be great! Not seeing any deals at for Nikon other then 3100's which im not interested in

fyu 05-01-2013 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlickCanon (Post 59199126)
Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59198882)
Equal pixel density is difficult in real world example. Difficult to actually compose same image between FF and Crop.

Crop has it's own advantages and disadvantages. For anything closer like birding, macro & close ups; crop wins hands down. All I am saying is that crop makes macro better in most if not all situations not worse.

Gotta disagree with you again there. Composing would be easier on FF since you have a 1.6x buffer zone around the subject to play with. On a crop that information is lost forever and cannot be recovered if later you decide you could have framed the shot better. Equal pixel density is a reality, look at Nikon d800 for instance. The only advantage to crop nowadays is that it's cheaper, and perhaps the images being smaller allowing you to fire off more PPS.

I found macro on crop is better.

RedSunOsiris 05-01-2013 05:45 PM

now OOS :(

impsteven 05-01-2013 06:09 PM

omg.. how did i miss this deal

notaxstate 05-01-2013 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlickCanon (Post 59199126)
Gotta disagree with you again there. Composing would be easier on FF since you have a 1.6x buffer zone around the subject to play with. On a crop that information is lost forever and cannot be recovered if later you decide you could have framed the shot better. Equal pixel density is a reality, look at Nikon d800 for instance. The only advantage to crop nowadays is that it's cheaper, and perhaps the images being smaller allowing you to fire off more PPS.

Didn't you just contradict your own statement here ? 1.6 buffer zone is available on Crop not on FF. So wouldn't it be easy to work with crop on macro rather than FF ?

The reality is that there is no equal pixel density for Canon at this point in time. If you use the same focal length on a 1.6X camera and a FF camera, the subject will appear at the same exact physical size on the sensor. It will take up a greater fraction of the 1.6X sensor (because the sensor is smaller) but the physical images on each sensor would be the same size.

Plus I've no idea what you are talking about here... information is lost forever and equal pixel density and images being smaller and fire more PPS....

SlickCanon 05-01-2013 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59201390)
Didn't you just contradict your own statement here ? 1.6 buffer zone is available on Crop not on FF. So wouldn't it be easy to work with crop on macro rather than FF ?

The reality is that there is no equal pixel density for Canon at this point in time. If you use the same focal length on a 1.6X camera and a FF camera, the subject will appear at the same exact physical size on the sensor. It will take up a greater fraction of the 1.6X sensor (because the sensor is smaller) but the physical images on each sensor would be the same size.

Plus I've no idea what you are talking about here... information is lost forever and equal pixel density and images being smaller and fire more PPS....

No, the buffer I'm talking about is all the extra information that the FF sensor picks up that the crop sensor does not. It makes it easier to take pictures of difficult subjects (for instance moving targets) since you don't have to have the exact right composition at the time of shooting.

This is what I meant by information lost forever (stuff happening outside the frame of the crop). By images being smaller: I mean, due to bandwidth & memory limitations, you can buffer more images in the camera's memory before it fills up than with FF. This allows you to burst faster and longer since there's less information moving around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59201390)
r. It will take up a greater fraction of the 1.6X sensor (because the sensor is smaller) but the physical images on each sensor would be the same size.

This is exactly correct. The physical size on the sensor will be the same, which is why I precluded with the pixel density comment. Holding true, crop sensor loses it's benefit over FF. And even if doesn't hold true in a specific comparison of two sensors, the one with lower pixel density will have better image quality at the cost of image detail (which is a worthwhile tradeoff for some). It's certainly not black and white.

tenderidol 05-01-2013 06:45 PM

Finally, it's sold out! It was getting more and more difficult to resist it.

nahpungnome 05-01-2013 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nataku00 (Post 59198438)
That's true, looking forward to some crazy zoomed in shots of household items with this lens!

Here's a shot I took with the lens on my XSi. It's a single piece of Kashi cereal :) Macro work is pretty damn challenging, but when you get the shot it's so rewarding.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nahp...3256090812

impsteven 05-01-2013 06:57 PM

Still pretty devastated I miss this sea =[

boombashi 05-01-2013 07:37 PM

damn - I've been watching for a good deal on this lens...missed it

notaxstate 05-01-2013 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlickCanon (Post 59201646)
No, the buffer I'm talking about is all the extra information that the FF sensor picks up that the crop sensor does not. It makes it easier to take pictures of difficult subjects (for instance moving targets) since you don't have to have the exact right composition at the time of shooting.

This is what I meant by information lost forever (stuff happening outside the frame of the crop). By images being smaller: I mean, due to bandwidth & memory limitations, you can buffer more images in the camera's memory before it fills up than with FF. This allows you to burst faster and longer since there's less information moving around.



This is exactly correct. The physical size on the sensor will be the same, which is why I precluded with the pixel density comment. Holding true, crop sensor loses it's benefit over FF. And even if doesn't hold true in a specific comparison of two sensors, the one with lower pixel density will have better image quality at the cost of image detail (which is a worthwhile tradeoff for some). It's certainly not black and white.

the one with lower pixel density will have better image quality at the cost of image detail What ???????

Again no idea what you are talking about. Who really cares about outside of frame, buffer, memory and suff when we are talking about focus.

Btw 7D which is crop is faster than 5D Mark IiI in terms of FPS and buffer.

PiratePenguin 05-01-2013 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nahpungnome (Post 59201924)
Here's a shot I took with the lens on my XSi. It's a single piece of Kashi cereal :) Macro work is pretty damn challenging, but when you get the shot it's so rewarding.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nahp...3256090812

Did you use an extension tube? I have the ef25 tube but not the100mm lens yet. That is really close so if that is with just the lens...damn

dirtmaster 05-01-2013 08:20 PM

My fav lens! best bokeh ive ever seen,.

SlickCanon 05-01-2013 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notaxstate (Post 59202982)
the one with lower pixel density will have better image quality at the cost of image detail What ???????

Again no idea what you are talking about. Who really cares about outside of frame, buffer, memory and suff when we are talking about focus.

Btw 7D which is crop is faster than 5D Mark IiI in terms of FPS and buffer.


You're not getting it are you:

Lower pixel density will give you a larger pixel pitch, which will cause each pixel sensor to be hit by more photons of light during the exposure. This is why lower density FF cameras have much better noise performance than high density crop sensors. There's a difference between image quality (pixel pitch) and detail (pixels per inch or granularity).
Here's a good read if you're interested:
http://www.clarkvision.com/articl...ze.matter/

We are not talking about focus, we are talking about composition and framing (at least I thought we were). The outside frame is relevant. It is always better to have more information (some of which can be removed later if desired) than less.

And about your point about the 7D, you should re-read what I wrote. I said the exact same thing you did, that cropped sensor data is smaller and therefore you can burst quicker and longer. This was one of the benefits of cropped sensors I mentioned way back in my first post.

fyu 05-01-2013 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlickCanon (Post 59203502)
You're not getting it are you:

Lower pixel density will give you a larger pixel pitch, which will cause each pixel sensor to be hit by more photons of light during the exposure. This is why lower density FF cameras have much better noise performance than high density crop sensors. There's a difference between image quality (pixel pitch) and detail (pixels per inch or granularity).
Here's a good read if you're interested:
http://www.clarkvision.com/articl...ze.matter/

We are not talking about focus, we are talking about composition and framing (at least I thought we were). The outside frame is relevant. It is always better to have more information (some of which can be removed later if desired) than less.

And about your point about the 7D, you should re-read what I wrote. I said the exact same thing you did, that cropped sensor data is smaller and therefore you can burst quicker and longer. This was one of the benefits of cropped sensors I mentioned way back in my first post.

uh.... at low ISOs it's very difficult to tell the difference.

in most macro situations light is controlled so low ISOs can be achieved.

fyi, the 7D is dual digic vs the single digic 5DII.

lol 05-01-2013 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boombashi (Post 59202510)
damn - I've been watching for a good deal on this lens...missed it

I feel your pain. You are not the only one here.

nahpungnome 05-01-2013 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiratePenguin (Post 59203058)
Did you use an extension tube? I have the ef25 tube but not the100mm lens yet. That is really close so if that is with just the lens...damn

I actually might have used my kenkos, but I don't remember

goldmemberer 05-01-2013 11:58 PM

anyone who bought this wanna flip it? PM :)

Excelsius 05-02-2013 12:11 AM

Got one. And it seems BuyDig is an authorized reseller, so the warranty is valid too. Thanks for the link.

Amaylin 05-02-2013 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtmaster (Post 59203270)
My fav lens! best bokeh ive ever seen,.

The best bokeh I've ever seen was on sigma 85mm 1.4

hou1960 05-02-2013 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaylin (Post 59208902)
The best bokeh I've ever seen was on sigma 85mm 1.4

how's about sigma 30mm 1.4 on crop?

Amaylin 05-02-2013 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hou1960 (Post 59214122)
how's about sigma 30mm 1.4 on crop?


I can't directly comment on 30mm sigma lens. I would imagine it's good.

azn3386 05-02-2013 08:30 PM

I have the 30mm f1.4 its a pretty kick butt lens. I heard the new 35mm f1.4 is the new benchmark though

dirtmaster 05-02-2013 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaylin (Post 59208902)
The best bokeh I've ever seen was on sigma 85mm 1.4

This lens has a lot of oval bokeh which im not a fan of.

Amaylin 05-03-2013 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirtmaster (Post 59228380)
This lens has a lot of oval bokeh which im not a fan of.

Did you mean cat's eye effect?

johnrambo007 05-04-2013 07:07 AM

mine shipped, will get it today
Awesome deal, thx OP!! :)


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:44 AM.