If you are on the fence when it comes to buying this beast, don't be. I was for a long time and finally bit the bullet and bought it. I'm very glad I did. It's worth every cent.
So you think I could use it for indoor sports photography? I’m looking for a fast medium telephoto prime to throw on an apsc camera. I know that isn’t what this lens is for, but I want it for range and for some details before games. (I think sports macro photography could be interesting)My other option is the 70-200 F4, but I really need the extra stop of light.
The focus shift is a deal breaker, even though focusing with a rail would be the standard anyway. The weird decision to add that spherical aberration ring seems out of place.
Great review! Finally picked this lens up for $999 with the $400 rebate just today (Jan 8, 2023). Don’t have the EF version, so it will be interesting to see what I’ve been missing.
Thank you for taking the time and considerable effort to put together this exhaustive review. The focus shift for me is a complete show stopper. I will add that I too have noted that my R6 mark2 loses its ability to focus in certain situations typically when using a longer zoom. It is almost as if some of the Canon's mirrorless stuff has been rushed to market. As a long time Canon user, wending my way through various DSLR cameras and lenses, all of which have been excellent, I am at loss to understand this drop off in quality. My R6 mark 2 is currently back at Canon for an examination because it honestly has not worked out of the box. Very tempted at this point to abandon Canon altogether and go with my wife's Nikon preference. I say that with some sadness.
Thanks for the review, I have a 3 day old RF 100 macro that will be returned to Canon. I hate that focus shift/back focus/focus drift, whatever you call it! The SA Control is also useless, if I want to get blurry images, I can just do it on the computer, or I can put a vaseline smeared filter on the front of the lens. Focus shift is really bad on mine, it starts the moment I stop down to F4, then it progresses all the way to F32. Sure I can manual focus, but it will be very difficult when chasing bugs. If only Canon put the "focus adjustment" back on the R5, I wouldn't return this lens. I heard Nikon and Sony have that feature on their mirrorless, and hope Canon will catch up. Anyway, Mr. Abbott, thanks again for the in depth review. More power to you Sir !
Have you tested this lens with the R5's focus bracketing function? I'm curious to know if the focus shift is an issue when using AF focus bracketing for macro.
I used to have the EF 100mm f2.8L IS USM that I used for portraits as well as macro. In portraits I often used Lee Filter Soft Effects 2 gel filter to blow highlights slightly that converts well to b&w and gives a retro Hollywood feel. I actually like the idea this effect is built in and will be useful to photographers like me. Definitely a lens on my shopping list but Canon do need to bring out a RF 85mm f1.4L IS USM (not a fan of the f1.2 size, weight & cost).
Hi! Amazing vid, very informative. I do weddings, events and portraits. I've been trying to decide between this lens and the Rf 70-200mm f4 for my distance shots. Which one would you recommend? The lens will be used on my b cam, an eos rp. I have the R6 with the Rf 28-70 f2. Thank you in advance.
Do you also want to do macro? I would lean towards the zoom for the flexibility and complimentary focal length, but having the ability to do macro for wedding work is very useful.
I'm more interested on the flexibility of distance shooting when needed. I only thought of the f2.8 macro just because of it's 100mm reach, not so much for the macro capability.
I see a lot of hate for the SA feature, and while I agree for standard macro or portrait stuff, my guess is, they looked at that massive range of product macro photographers that might be able to layer or stack those softer or harder backgrounds with a non-adjusted, sharp subjects
Be very interesting to see a comparison between this and the recent 105mm Sigma Art f2.8 Macro, you seemed far more impressed with the Sigma in that review from what I remember. Keep up the great work :-)
Too bad the Sigma isn't available for RF mount :( I get tired of using adapted lenses... All this being said, the Canon is actually a FANTASTIC macro lens, and maybe Canon thought the majority of it's users wanted this for macro. One thing is for sure, they didn't want us to enjoy it for portrait work like the EF version. That's too bad, because I don't primarily DO portrait work, but my family frequently requests I do shots of them with the EF version. I COULD still do it, but I hate that I would have to manual focus for it. It's kinda crappy.
Thanks for the review, that SA Control seems like a useless addition(as a dedicated macro shooter) and the focus shift(completely unacceptable) means it's just not worth the asking price of $1400 and existing EF version is still goto choice.
@@LevAizik I shoot portraits stop down, using my EF Goldring F2.8 Macro on portraits. I usually shoot at F8 at a studio environment. So saying that AF is pointless, is kinda like negating it as a great portrait lens too.
@@caodesignworks2407 RF 70-200mm L had similar focus shift issue and it was fixed by firmware update but only after outrage from customers. Given this is macro lens, its difficult there will be fix as its low volume product compared to likes of 70-200mm.
I had this issue while borrowing the lens for jewelry product images. All manual focus but still doing the focus shift. The point of focus just doesn’t look sharp. I was stopped down but I mean diffraction aside, it should be able to actually be focused where you’re trying to focus. Very weird and astonishing that they would release a lens like this on a new mount that’s supposed to be facilitating previously impossible (on the old mount/flange distance) functionality.
Thank you for a great review, Dustin. This helps me decide whether I should replace EF to RF 100 macro. I'm a underwater photographer. And based on this review, there is no point for me to upgrade because at the end the length of these two lenses (and plus EF-RF adapter) are the same.
Thanks for your detailed videos. I was in to replace my EF 100mm first gen lens but this focus shift has deterred me from updating. I will wait for them to fix this issue else it is a no go.
Thanks Dustin, great work as always. I'd be waiting to hear your take on this lens. The focus shift is really very unfortunate, as I commonly use my EF100mm Macro for portraits and jewellery modelling, where I either need the focus tack sharp on the eye or on the gemstone. I can just imagine the amount of slightly missed focus shots that would ruin an otherwise great frame. Such a shame.
Wonderful Review again sir, would like to ask, if the ef version focus shifts on the R series or camera series as well when stopped down? Or is this still only unique to the RF?
I really appreciate the review Dustin, thank you. I recently moved to the Canon R Series (I’d been previously spoiled with the Sony 90mm Macro) and am considering this lens. When shooting macro I generally stop down to F/5.6 and AlWAYS manually focus. How big (or insignificant) is the focus shift situation given that use case? I’m asking you because I recently watched an entire TH-cam video on this lens/topic only to find out that the presenter had absolutely no experience using the lens.
Thank you for your video, Dustin! We are trying to use the RF 100mm macro to digitize slides. Is there a recommended distance to use to get the sharpest images? We set the R5 camera to manual, F8, ISO 100, and then change the shutter speed as needed. Would we be better off getting the EF 100 with an adapter? Thank you!
I recently checked on Canon's prices on L lenses. I was shocked to see that the 100mm F2.8 macro has gone up in MSRP from $995 CAD to $1695 CAD! I bought mine 4 years ago, and paid about $900 CAD back then.
Another reviewer commented on the 100mm macro focus shift when comparing to the Sony macro, saying it was due to the fact the Canon AF focusses using a fully open aperture, whereas presumably the Sony doesn't. I had the Sony 90 GM macro, and was very impressed with its performance, also being one of the sharpest Sony lenses according to DXO, and highly accurate AF when doing macro. I wish Canon would forget about SA control...I have never heard a positive opinion of it, and undoubtedly we are paying for the 'feature'.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Never in my life have I seen a lens manufacturer try to make a defect a "feature". Also, what in the HELL is up with Canon's RF lens prices? Many of the 'L' lenses don't even have IS... I have an R5, and I've really been waiting for Canon to stop f***ing around... I really WANT the system to work.
Tnx for the excellent review as always. It wasn't bad enough that I was torn between the 50 and the 85 f/1.2 as my next prime purchase, mow I have a third prime thrown in the mix. I like the 85 the most (it's like an exotic sports car), but the 50 will be more versatile, you can live with exquisiteness every day, and the 100 can do macro none of the other two can do (plus it is ultra-sharp). I give up :-))
@@DustinAbbottTWI thx Dustin I appreciate your lights but 1,2 is amazing bokeh; esp for the 85, and the 100 as a portrait lens at 2.8 is not special enough for me as I already have a EF 70-200 lS L II. So I’ll be getting it mainly for the macro side which why I’m torn between the three as to which goes first. My mind says the 50 but my heart the 85. I wonder how the old EF 85 f/1.2 II and the f/1.4 measure up against the RF I’ve see your and other reviews but of course the real world experience varies and you can only tell if the added expenditure is justified for you as an individual after you used both sets of lenses extensively and I cannot do that (for a variety of reasons). Similarly I’ve been thinking about the EF 34 f/1.4 instead of RF 50 f/1.2. This would allow me to cover similar things at a smaller budget and speed up their acquisition.
Funny story, I got this lens today and didn't know about the SA control n lock. Went to test shoot and only half way I realize the SA control and it was all way -ve. Hahaha. The creative side is good but sharpness was not my cup of tea. At least now i know hahaha.
@@DustinAbbottTWI believe it or not, this is my first L lens. Other than that SA, this lens is superb. Regarding the focus shift... well, I haven't really use above f5.6, so, have not notice it. I actually want to invest more now on L lens but then the rumors about Sigma will finally release RF lens is holding any further purchase 😄
In this case it wouldn't actually help. The type of autofocus found in R bodies doesn't need micro-adjustment, and focus shift comes when the lens has focused properly (wide open), but then focus shifts as the lens is stopped down to the desired aperture.
Light transmission is an interesting one. It would have been a much fatter lens like the Otus if light transmission were to be improved in the RF. If you shoot portrait the older EF lens is better because the corner sharpness is a detraction and better light transmission gives it a pop. You havent compared bokeh between the EF and RF. The fewer CA correction in the EF I should imagine has better bokeh than the RF.
Thanks for the review. Very thorough as always. Do you think that canon could fix the focus shift issue by letting the camera focus on this particular lens while stopped down via firmware update? As far as I know even when you’re stopped down, canon cameras focus always wide open and I think that’s where the problem lies with focus shift in this lens. This isn’t a problem with other lenses but certainly is for this particular lens
Great review as always. I am torn between the 50 1.2 and this macro lens. I know about the focus shift issue and my belief is that is cause by the addition of that SA gimmick. I will wait for good offers on both, but I just love their looks. I think the 100mm macro would be a great addition to anyones kit. I could have bought the 50 for 2.000 usd new, but I skipped it to see if the 100 will be on sale next year. Canon will not go out of their way to fix the focus shift because they don’t sell volumes of this specific lens (i believe, I’m not sure). Kudos on the premium review as always.
Hi Andrei, it obviously depends on what you shoot mostly, but for what it's worth, here's my experience. There are quite a few very affordable lenses that can do a lot of what this lens does for a fraction of the price. The EF, but also older Canon 100 macros and Sigma 105 2.8 macros have very, very good IQ and do MOST of what the 100 RF offers. The 50 1.2 though is something unique, there isn't really an affordable alternative that can give what this lens does at 1.2. So my advice would be to get the 50 and use an affordable alternative for macro shots.
Hi Dustin, Great Review. I was looking to purchase this lens, but for the price higher thant the rf85mm F2.0, do you recommand the rf85 f2.0. Im doing mainly wedding and would like to have it for portrait and macro, so an 85mm is a nice focal range for this type of shot. I own a R5 with the RF50mm f1.2 lens , a EF 35L and a 70-200 Tamron lens as well in my bag. Im verry picky on my image quality and product quality. I dont do video. Thanks. Rey
Many of the RF zoom lenses have also an increase in diameter just after the zoom ring or in it, so I get the haptical confusion about it, but I feel having the abberation control in between focus and control ring would be worse. And about the abberation control and the photos it produces, I see this type of dreamy photo/edit often from Japanese photographers and so Canon adding it does not seem so outlandish.
I ordered and paid for this this lens (Canon RF 100mm Macro Lens) almost a year ago now and understand that I had to wait 6-months to get this lens but I still don't have the "Tripod Mount Ring and Adapter" yet and Canon has refused to comment to B&H for an update. I believe that to be unacceptable customer service and therefore can't recommend "Canon equipment" to anyone.
Thank you for a great video with wonderful content about an interesting lens. I am curious to see what Sigma might come up with, now that Canon is gradually opening the RF mount. Their 70mm macro was brilliant. Particularly with the SA ring that would only be in the way for me. It is only useful for who wants to walk in David Hamilton's footsteps. ;-) For your presentation, it might help you to work on your pronunciation of the letter 't', particularly when it occurs in the middle or at the end of words. Always keep up improving :-)
Doing cross platform reviews is a little complicated, particularly when the resolution of the bodies doesn't match. The Canon has a few advantages (IS, higher magnification) but also has a profound weakness (focus shift) that the Sony does not have. The Sony also has the better focus ring.
@@DustinAbbottTWI cheers. I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my question. I want to go with the Sony for my A1. But the fact that it’s a six year old lens. Makes me wonder. I also have a canon system so I’m not spoiled for choice.
SA Control may could find some use when there is no mist filter at hand to smush up things a bit when one can‘t deal with the brutality of detail. … „Forget about using it ever again“ says all, about the SA-Control just another ring to catch up sand and shrink lens life time :)
I've been using the EF version of the 100mm macro and recently bought an R5. I've been reviewing which RF lenses I want to go native with. I had thought the 70-200 2.8, but decided against that because telextenders can't be used with it. And the SA addition with resultant focus shift is scaring me away from the 100mm macro. I'm very disappointed.
I've been disappointed to. Early signs seemed like the RF lenses were going to be really exceptional, but there's been a potentially fatal flaw in a number of them.
Although I m not a Canon shooter, I ve being really looking forward to this review Waiting to see what Sony's response will be. Or at least I think there should be a response. There is no GM macro dedicated lens yet And by 'response' I mean having a superior, higher resolving lens with over x1 magnification (that innovative bokeh/creative switch doesnt appeal to me either!) My 90mm still feels very competitive, but Sigma proved we could still expect some better resolution and other minor improvement here and there Just to add up - regarding your observation of this lens' reluctance to focus to nearby objects; I do experience that often with my 90mm (on my A7RIII). I often use DMF to speed up getting close to where I want to, but then it struggles to focus as I reach that minimum focus distance (~28cm) (also distance switch is set to shortest distance). Maybe that's a trait for macro lenses in general, not being the fastest in AF
@Oh hi I don't really use AF in macro anymore...tried using DMF at first, in an attempt to save me some time whilst focusing, but for my type of shooting there are very few scenarios I benefit from it. Let's see *when* actually Sony will decide to release a GM Macro. Those rumors have been going on for quite a while now, but no bueno so far The ones I ve been hearing about, speculate 100mm FL, which might as well be useful in providing a bigger working distance Still (and even though Dustin was happy with it), I am not very happy about the 90mm focus ring for tiny adjustments (i.e. focus stacking). Maybe the competition is no better in this respect (as I haven't tried any macro lenses from Sigma, Laowa of VL), but I m struggling with it at times. I would like to have longer focus throw in my macro lens. I don't want speed. I want accuracy
@@DustinAbbottTWI I was considering it at first, but decided to give Sony some time, see if those rumors come true Same happened when I was waiting Sigma's response, for a long tele lens. Ended up buying the Sony and 2 months later, the 150-600mm came out. But luckily in this case, haven't regretted opting for the 200-600mm I do love what I ve heard about the 110mm though. Not only about the superior IQ, but also sunstar rendering (haven't got a straight-blade diaphragm lens yet!) and the electronic contacts (big advantage over the Laowa options)
I would buy this tomorrow but the focus shift seems to be a fatal flaw, especially for my application (photographing paintings). How can F5.6 be softer than F2.8? Very foolish, and seems like it could be easily fixed in firmware by just shifting focus a known amount prior to shutter release.
It's hard to top the IQ of the Laowa. I just picked up an RF mount version of it and am loving it. I reviewed it on EF a few years back, but it works so much better on mirrorless.
@@DustinAbbottTWI just binged your RF Mount lens reviews. Great stuff really. Opinions on EF 70-200 f/4ii vs RF 70-200 f/2.8 with image quality? I’m looking to upgrade.
The word you want is 'ambivalent' (not bothered one way or the other, take it or leave it) whereas 'ambiguous' is where the meaning is unclear. Can't help being a teacher ... I love your reviews though, thanks!
Hi Steve, you're probably right. I can't recall the context of how I used the word without going back to search for it...and I just don't have time for that!
![ภาพนี้ก็ฮาเหมือนกันนะเนี้ย #7 SS9 [ พากย์นรก MEME.EXE ] | easy boy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MFDRhuT4RAg/mqdefault.jpg)
this guy still makes the most excellent lens reviews on youtube.
Thank you very much!
100%
If you are on the fence when it comes to buying this beast, don't be. I was for a long time and finally bit the bullet and bought it. I'm very glad I did. It's worth every cent.
I'm glad you are enjoying it.
So you think I could use it for indoor sports photography? I’m looking for a fast medium telephoto prime to throw on an apsc camera. I know that isn’t what this lens is for, but I want it for range and for some details before games. (I think sports macro photography could be interesting)My other option is the 70-200 F4, but I really need the extra stop of light.
I would use this for more portrait photos and upclose b roll video application. Would the focus breathing and focus shift be a deal breaker?
Probably not.
The focus shift is a deal breaker, even though focusing with a rail would be the standard anyway. The weird decision to add that spherical aberration ring seems out of place.
It's really strange.
Great review! Finally picked this lens up for $999 with the $400 rebate just today (Jan 8, 2023). Don’t have the EF version, so it will be interesting to see what I’ve been missing.
Enjoy!
Thank you for taking the time and considerable effort to put together this exhaustive review. The focus shift for me is a complete show stopper. I will add that I too have noted that my R6 mark2 loses its ability to focus in certain situations typically when using a longer zoom. It is almost as if some of the Canon's mirrorless stuff has been rushed to market. As a long time Canon user, wending my way through various DSLR cameras and lenses, all of which have been excellent, I am at loss to understand this drop off in quality. My R6 mark 2 is currently back at Canon for an examination because it honestly has not worked out of the box. Very tempted at this point to abandon Canon altogether and go with my wife's Nikon preference. I say that with some sadness.
That's really unfortunate.
Thanks for the review, I have a 3 day old RF 100 macro that will be returned to Canon. I hate that focus shift/back focus/focus drift, whatever you call it! The SA Control is also useless, if I want to get blurry images, I can just do it on the computer, or I can put a vaseline smeared filter on the front of the lens. Focus shift is really bad on mine, it starts the moment I stop down to F4, then it progresses all the way to F32. Sure I can manual focus, but it will be very difficult when chasing bugs. If only Canon put the "focus adjustment" back on the R5, I wouldn't return this lens. I heard Nikon and Sony have that feature on their mirrorless, and hope Canon will catch up. Anyway, Mr. Abbott, thanks again for the in depth review. More power to you Sir !
Thanks, Nokian. It's a shame, as the lens is optically brilliant otherwise and the extra amount of magnification is very useful.
Have you tested this lens with the R5's focus bracketing function? I'm curious to know if the focus shift is an issue when using AF focus bracketing for macro.
I didn't test that
I used to have the EF 100mm f2.8L IS USM that I used for portraits as well as macro. In portraits I often used Lee Filter Soft Effects 2 gel filter to blow highlights slightly that converts well to b&w and gives a retro Hollywood feel. I actually like the idea this effect is built in and will be useful to photographers like me. Definitely a lens on my shopping list but Canon do need to bring out a RF 85mm f1.4L IS USM (not a fan of the f1.2 size, weight & cost).
Hi Jeff, you're the first to write and say you're actually interested in the effects - so I'm glad there is SOME audience for it!
Hi! Amazing vid, very informative. I do weddings, events and portraits. I've been trying to decide between this lens and the Rf 70-200mm f4 for my distance shots. Which one would you recommend? The lens will be used on my b cam, an eos rp. I have the R6 with the Rf 28-70 f2. Thank you in advance.
Do you also want to do macro? I would lean towards the zoom for the flexibility and complimentary focal length, but having the ability to do macro for wedding work is very useful.
I'm more interested on the flexibility of distance shooting when needed. I only thought of the f2.8 macro just because of it's 100mm reach, not so much for the macro capability.
I see a lot of hate for the SA feature, and while I agree for standard macro or portrait stuff, my guess is, they looked at that massive range of product macro photographers that might be able to layer or stack those softer or harder backgrounds with a non-adjusted, sharp subjects
Perhaps, but I haven't had much of that kind of feedback from people. Most people just find it gimmicky.
Be very interesting to see a comparison between this and the recent 105mm Sigma Art f2.8 Macro, you seemed far more impressed with the Sigma in that review from what I remember. Keep up the great work :-)
but it cant be used with canon bodies
Unfortunately (for now), that lens is only available on Sony FE and Leica L, not Canon RF.
Too bad the Sigma isn't available for RF mount :( I get tired of using adapted lenses... All this being said, the Canon is actually a FANTASTIC macro lens, and maybe Canon thought the majority of it's users wanted this for macro. One thing is for sure, they didn't want us to enjoy it for portrait work like the EF version. That's too bad, because I don't primarily DO portrait work, but my family frequently requests I do shots of them with the EF version. I COULD still do it, but I hate that I would have to manual focus for it. It's kinda crappy.
@@benjaminmesa1089 Why do you have to manual focus???
Thanks for the review, that SA Control seems like a useless addition(as a dedicated macro shooter) and the focus shift(completely unacceptable) means it's just not worth the asking price of $1400 and existing EF version is still goto choice.
AF is pointless at extreme magnification.
@@LevAizik when working with reptiles and amphibians in field AF is often a necessity.
@@LevAizik I shoot portraits stop down, using my EF Goldring F2.8 Macro on portraits. I usually shoot at F8 at a studio environment. So saying that AF is pointless, is kinda like negating it as a great portrait lens too.
Shift is something they can likely fix with a software update and will likely fix with one.
@@caodesignworks2407 RF 70-200mm L had similar focus shift issue and it was fixed by firmware update but only after outrage from customers. Given this is macro lens, its difficult there will be fix as its low volume product compared to likes of 70-200mm.
Thanks for the great review. Just to be clear, is the solution to the focus shift issue simply to refocus after stopping down? Thanks again.
For macro, I'd just use manual focus. In most other situations, the depth of field makes it less of an issue.
I had this issue while borrowing the lens for jewelry product images. All manual focus but still doing the focus shift. The point of focus just doesn’t look sharp. I was stopped down but I mean diffraction aside, it should be able to actually be focused where you’re trying to focus. Very weird and astonishing that they would release a lens like this on a new mount that’s supposed to be facilitating previously impossible (on the old mount/flange distance) functionality.
Great review! What tabletop tripod did you use in the review?
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
Thanks for yet another great review. Just starting out and i will be getting this Lens together with the R6-ii. Greetings from Germany
Enjoy!
Thank you for a great review, Dustin. This helps me decide whether I should replace EF to RF 100 macro. I'm a underwater photographer. And based on this review, there is no point for me to upgrade because at the end the length of these two lenses (and plus EF-RF adapter) are the same.
That sounds reasonable.
Thanks for your detailed videos. I was in to replace my EF 100mm first gen lens but this focus shift has deterred me from updating. I will wait for them to fix this issue else it is a no go.
It really is unfortunate, because it otherwise is an awesome lens.
Thanks Dustin, great work as always. I'd be waiting to hear your take on this lens. The focus shift is really very unfortunate, as I commonly use my EF100mm Macro for portraits and jewellery modelling, where I either need the focus tack sharp on the eye or on the gemstone. I can just imagine the amount of slightly missed focus shots that would ruin an otherwise great frame. Such a shame.
Totally agree
@@DustinAbbottTWI maybe it will be fixed in a update?
It may prove less of an issue on three dimensional objects vs flat images on walls. Especially at macro distances.
You are one of the serious reviewer
I think that's true.
Wonderful Review again sir, would like to ask, if the ef version focus shifts on the R series or camera series as well when stopped down? Or is this still only unique to the RF?
It seems to be unique to the EF
i love your reviews. i just got the lens.
i shoot with a Canon R5. should i turn off the IS on the lens when shooting with a tripod?
The best policy is yes as a rule of thumb, though Canon does claim that their IS system detects when the lens is on a tripod.
@@DustinAbbottTWI i found the page in the manual that said to turn IS off on the lens. IDK about the R5 IBIS
Turning off the lens IS automatically disables the IBIS.
I really appreciate the review Dustin, thank you. I recently moved to the Canon R Series (I’d been previously spoiled with the Sony 90mm Macro) and am considering this lens. When shooting macro I generally stop down to F/5.6 and AlWAYS manually focus. How big (or insignificant) is the focus shift situation given that use case? I’m asking you because I recently watched an entire TH-cam video on this lens/topic only to find out that the presenter had absolutely no experience using the lens.
Focus shift shouldn't be an issue under the user scenario you describe.
Thank you for your video, Dustin! We are trying to use the RF 100mm macro to digitize slides. Is there a recommended distance to use to get the sharpest images? We set the R5 camera to manual, F8, ISO 100, and then change the shutter speed as needed. Would we be better off getting the EF 100 with an adapter? Thank you!
Hi John, if you are using manual focus in your application, then I think you've got the best lens for your job.
I am in manual mode. I just need to get a true 1:1 rather than 1:4 or something smaller than 1:1.
Thanks!
Great review thanks !
Does the F11 limit for high resolution bodies apply only to macro or in general. I own a R5.
You mention this at 22:50
I typically prefer a practical limit of F11 with all lenses on high resolution bodies. You take a hit in sharpness due to diffraction after that.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks!
Thanks for yet another great review. Question: Is the focus shift issue hardware? Or software? Has it, or might it, be fixed with a firmware update?
That's a good question, but not one I have an answer for. I suspect it is hardware, otherwise I think Canon would have addressed it already.
As usual great content, thanks for this review!
My pleasure!
I recently checked on Canon's prices on L lenses. I was shocked to see that the 100mm F2.8 macro has gone up in MSRP from $995 CAD to $1695 CAD! I bought mine 4 years ago, and paid about $900 CAD back then.
It really is quite shocking. I sold mine used recently for as much as I paid for it 12 years ago.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I guess Canon came to the realization that they should charge as much as the market can bear. And it is a very good lens.
Great review. One question to you how to get rid of the focus shift if shooting in minimum focus distance within f4 to f8 apperture ?
I actually saw focus shift less up close and more at other distances.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you
Been waiting for this review!
Enjoy
Another reviewer commented on the 100mm macro focus shift when comparing to the Sony macro, saying it was due to the fact the Canon AF focusses using a fully open aperture, whereas presumably the Sony doesn't. I had the Sony 90 GM macro, and was very impressed with its performance, also being one of the sharpest Sony lenses according to DXO, and highly accurate AF when doing macro. I wish Canon would forget about SA control...I have never heard a positive opinion of it, and undoubtedly we are paying for the 'feature'.
I actually think the SA control is to blame for the focus shift...which is a stupid move on Canon's part.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Never in my life have I seen a lens manufacturer try to make a defect a "feature". Also, what in the HELL is up with Canon's RF lens prices? Many of the 'L' lenses don't even have IS...
I have an R5, and I've really been waiting for Canon to stop f***ing around... I really WANT the system to work.
Thanks for this video review!!! Great job, as always...
My pleasure!
Tnx for the excellent review as always. It wasn't bad enough that I was torn between the 50 and the 85 f/1.2 as my next prime purchase, mow I have a third prime thrown in the mix. I like the 85 the most (it's like an exotic sports car), but the 50 will be more versatile, you can live with exquisiteness every day, and the 100 can do macro none of the other two can do (plus it is ultra-sharp). I give up :-))
It's hard to top a macro lens for versatility in a prime. They do a lot of things well.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thx Dustin I appreciate your lights but 1,2 is amazing bokeh; esp for the 85, and the 100 as a portrait lens at 2.8 is not special enough for me as I already have a EF 70-200 lS L II. So I’ll be getting it mainly for the macro side which why I’m torn between the three as to which goes first. My mind says the 50 but my heart the 85. I wonder how the old EF 85 f/1.2 II and the f/1.4 measure up against the RF I’ve see your and other reviews but of course the real world experience varies and you can only tell if the added expenditure is justified for you as an individual after you used both sets of lenses extensively and I cannot do that (for a variety of reasons). Similarly I’ve been thinking about the EF 34 f/1.4 instead of RF 50 f/1.2. This would allow me to cover similar things at a smaller budget and speed up their acquisition.
So if you kee it at zero you don’t get focus shift ?
Unfortunately that’s not really the case. Zero eliminates the SA effect, but the focus shift is a different problem.
Focus shift in the modern 1400$ macro lens, what a shame.
Agreed
Focusing issue is this lens.???
Funny story, I got this lens today and didn't know about the SA control n lock. Went to test shoot and only half way I realize the SA control and it was all way -ve. Hahaha. The creative side is good but sharpness was not my cup of tea. At least now i know hahaha.
Exactly. That SA control is going to cause a lot of unsuspecting people some grief. My guess is that Canon is going to regret putting it in there.
@@DustinAbbottTWI believe it or not, this is my first L lens. Other than that SA, this lens is superb. Regarding the focus shift... well, I haven't really use above f5.6, so, have not notice it. I actually want to invest more now on L lens but then the rumors about Sigma will finally release RF lens is holding any further purchase 😄
Canon needs to bring back in camera lens correction
In this case it wouldn't actually help. The type of autofocus found in R bodies doesn't need micro-adjustment, and focus shift comes when the lens has focused properly (wide open), but then focus shifts as the lens is stopped down to the desired aperture.
Light transmission is an interesting one. It would have been a much fatter lens like the Otus if light transmission were to be improved in the RF. If you shoot portrait the older EF lens is better because the corner sharpness is a detraction and better light transmission gives it a pop. You havent compared bokeh between the EF and RF. The fewer CA correction in the EF I should imagine has better bokeh than the RF.
That all seems plausible to me.
Thanks for the review. Very thorough as always. Do you think that canon could fix the focus shift issue by letting the camera focus on this particular lens while stopped down via firmware update? As far as I know even when you’re stopped down, canon cameras focus always wide open and I think that’s where the problem lies with focus shift in this lens. This isn’t a problem with other lenses but certainly is for this particular lens
The short answer is that I don't know if that is possible, though yes, that should in theory be a workable solution.
Great review as always. I am torn between the 50 1.2 and this macro lens. I know about the focus shift issue and my belief is that is cause by the addition of that SA gimmick. I will wait for good offers on both, but I just love their looks. I think the 100mm macro would be a great addition to anyones kit. I could have bought the 50 for 2.000 usd new, but I skipped it to see if the 100 will be on sale next year. Canon will not go out of their way to fix the focus shift because they don’t sell volumes of this specific lens (i believe, I’m not sure). Kudos on the premium review as always.
I do think the SA control does play a part here...which is really unfortunate.
Hi Andrei,
it obviously depends on what you shoot mostly, but for what it's worth, here's my experience. There are quite a few very affordable lenses that can do a lot of what this lens does for a fraction of the price. The EF, but also older Canon 100 macros and Sigma 105 2.8 macros have very, very good IQ and do MOST of what the 100 RF offers.
The 50 1.2 though is something unique, there isn't really an affordable alternative that can give what this lens does at 1.2. So my advice would be to get the 50 and use an affordable alternative for macro shots.
Hi Dustin, Great Review. I was looking to purchase this lens, but for the price higher thant the rf85mm F2.0, do you recommand the rf85 f2.0. Im doing mainly wedding and would like to have it for portrait and macro, so an 85mm is a nice focal range for this type of shot. I own a R5 with the RF50mm f1.2 lens , a EF 35L and a 70-200 Tamron lens as well in my bag. Im verry picky on my image quality and product quality. I dont do video.
Thanks. Rey
Hi Ray, the 85mm is good optically, but the autofocus is pretty poor. I'd personally go with this one over that.
What Tripod is the camera mounted on, Dustin?
It's this one right here: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
Thanks, love your content Dustin, Awesome job on all of your video's!
Many of the RF zoom lenses have also an increase in diameter just after the zoom ring or in it, so I get the haptical confusion about it, but I feel having the abberation control in between focus and control ring would be worse. And about the abberation control and the photos it produces, I see this type of dreamy photo/edit often from Japanese photographers and so Canon adding it does not seem so outlandish.
It's true that it could be more of a trend in other places than North America.
Thank you Dustin another good review hope they may sort out the focus issue at higher F stops like F8 with a firmware ? for the lens ?
Fingers crossed! I honestly don't know if that's something that firmware fixes or not
@@DustinAbbottTWI they did something to the RF 70-200 f2 8 On it's focus I think
Perhaps the SA feature on this lens is for those who think the slider on R is a fantastic feature.
LOL - Exactly!
Just ordered. Can’t wait to get it
By the way. What’s the name of the little tripod you’re using?
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
Great review, Dustin. I compared this lens to Contax 645 120macro apo, they're close optically, but RF 100has autofocus
For sure.
Super recenze.Máte výborné recenze👍
Thanks for the great review Sir. I have seen some recommend SA minus 2 for portraits.
People's taste varies, obviously. I preferred the sharp version ;)
I ordered and paid for this this lens (Canon RF 100mm Macro Lens) almost a year ago now and understand that I had to wait 6-months to get this lens but I still don't have the "Tripod Mount Ring and Adapter" yet and Canon has refused to comment to B&H for an update. I believe that to be unacceptable customer service and therefore can't recommend "Canon equipment" to anyone.
That's unfortunate, for sure.
Thank you for a great video with wonderful content about an interesting lens. I am curious to see what Sigma might come up with, now that Canon is gradually opening the RF mount. Their 70mm macro was brilliant. Particularly with the SA ring that would only be in the way for me. It is only useful for who wants to walk in David Hamilton's footsteps. ;-)
For your presentation, it might help you to work on your pronunciation of the letter 't', particularly when it occurs in the middle or at the end of words. Always keep up improving :-)
Thanks for the great review. Now I don't know if I should buy it because of the focus shift.
It makes the decision far more challenging, to be sure.
Dustin you are gold!
Thank you
Thank you Sir, I am right now peeling off the electrical tape keeping that SA ring locked. I too had no idea there was a lock switch.
LOL - I'm glad you caught this video, then.
Whats the name of the Tri-Pod.
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
Has anyone done a review of this lens vs the FE 90mm G? Optically which is better.
Doing cross platform reviews is a little complicated, particularly when the resolution of the bodies doesn't match. The Canon has a few advantages (IS, higher magnification) but also has a profound weakness (focus shift) that the Sony does not have. The Sony also has the better focus ring.
@@DustinAbbottTWI cheers. I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my question. I want to go with the Sony for my A1. But the fact that it’s a six year old lens. Makes me wonder. I also have a canon system so I’m not spoiled for choice.
It's not an easy choice. The Sony holds up well, though. It doesn't feel dated to me.
Does a software update fix focus shift ? That makes me not want it
It’s possible, but that remains to be seen
SA Control may could find some use when there is no mist filter at hand to smush up things a bit when one can‘t deal with the brutality of detail. … „Forget about using it ever again“ says all, about the SA-Control just another ring to catch up sand and shrink lens life time :)
That could be an application, but I would prefer to do that in post where you have more control over the effect, myself.
Yeah... This is an instance where I'll just stick to and keep the EF lens.
An unfortunate reality here.
I've been using the EF version of the 100mm macro and recently bought an R5. I've been reviewing which RF lenses I want to go native with. I had thought the 70-200 2.8, but decided against that because telextenders can't be used with it. And the SA addition with resultant focus shift is scaring me away from the 100mm macro. I'm very disappointed.
I've been disappointed to. Early signs seemed like the RF lenses were going to be really exceptional, but there's been a potentially fatal flaw in a number of them.
Although I m not a Canon shooter, I ve being really looking forward to this review
Waiting to see what Sony's response will be. Or at least I think there should be a response. There is no GM macro dedicated lens yet
And by 'response' I mean having a superior, higher resolving lens with over x1 magnification (that innovative bokeh/creative switch doesnt appeal to me either!)
My 90mm still feels very competitive, but Sigma proved we could still expect some better resolution and other minor improvement here and there
Just to add up - regarding your observation of this lens' reluctance to focus to nearby objects; I do experience that often with my 90mm (on my A7RIII). I often use DMF to speed up getting close to where I want to, but then it struggles to focus as I reach that minimum focus distance (~28cm) (also distance switch is set to shortest distance). Maybe that's a trait for macro lenses in general, not being the fastest in AF
@Oh hi I don't really use AF in macro anymore...tried using DMF at first, in an attempt to save me some time whilst focusing, but for my type of shooting there are very few scenarios I benefit from it. Let's see *when* actually Sony will decide to release a GM Macro. Those rumors have been going on for quite a while now, but no bueno so far
The ones I ve been hearing about, speculate 100mm FL, which might as well be useful in providing a bigger working distance
Still (and even though Dustin was happy with it), I am not very happy about the 90mm focus ring for tiny adjustments (i.e. focus stacking). Maybe the competition is no better in this respect (as I haven't tried any macro lenses from Sigma, Laowa of VL), but I m struggling with it at times. I would like to have longer focus throw in my macro lens. I don't want speed. I want accuracy
hi Jason, you might consider the Voigtlander 110mm F2.5 (bhpho.to/3dgt9TC). Amazing optics, amazing manual focus. It's a lovely lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I was considering it at first, but decided to give Sony some time, see if those rumors come true
Same happened when I was waiting Sigma's response, for a long tele lens. Ended up buying the Sony and 2 months later, the 150-600mm came out. But luckily in this case, haven't regretted opting for the 200-600mm
I do love what I ve heard about the 110mm though. Not only about the superior IQ, but also sunstar rendering (haven't got a straight-blade diaphragm lens yet!) and the electronic contacts (big advantage over the Laowa options)
I would buy this tomorrow but the focus shift seems to be a fatal flaw, especially for my application (photographing paintings). How can F5.6 be softer than F2.8? Very foolish, and seems like it could be easily fixed in firmware by just shifting focus a known amount prior to shutter release.
It's unfortunate, for sure.
26:52 it is because inflation.
Focus shift means an absolute no go for me.
Understood.
I really don't understand Canon. Their macro lenses should be 2x. I went the laowa 100mm 2x way. Awesome lens.
I own the Laowa 100mm, and I picked up this RF100 macro. I have to admit, for actual macro shots, I'm preferring the Laowa 100.
It's hard to top the IQ of the Laowa. I just picked up an RF mount version of it and am loving it. I reviewed it on EF a few years back, but it works so much better on mirrorless.
Thanks Dustin.
My pleasure.
Lol I found you in search. Great timing on posting
Welcome aboard!
@@DustinAbbottTWI just binged your RF Mount lens reviews. Great stuff really. Opinions on EF 70-200 f/4ii vs RF 70-200 f/2.8 with image quality? I’m looking to upgrade.
The SA ring is such a useless marketing gimmick on this lens :/
Unfortunately I agree.
I love it
I'm glad you are enjoying it.
@DustinAbbottTWI I love it for insects and flowers and got some mind blowing shots. its pleasure to use.
Hi from mid-frame!
Hello there!
The word you want is 'ambivalent' (not bothered one way or the other, take it or leave it) whereas 'ambiguous' is where the meaning is unclear. Can't help being a teacher ... I love your reviews though, thanks!
Hi Steve, you're probably right. I can't recall the context of how I used the word without going back to search for it...and I just don't have time for that!
Inflation is on the rise.
That is unfortunately very true.
I don't like the bokeh ring but It doesn't bother me either.
Good. Then enjoy.
Just bought this lens for $686
Wow- that's a bargain!
@@DustinAbbottTWI I simply could not resist
minus and plus sa look equally trash, still i love the new 100 2.8
Agreed - it is a nice lens that is not improved by that feature