So I'm looking to get an RF prime lens for macro and street photography

[JFG]

Hello everyone,

So, I'm looking for a new prime lens, for macro photography. However, although I want a good RF lens for macro, I'm also thinking that the lens should at least be versatile to shoot more than just "macro photography". So, I was thinking of the RF 35mm f1.4 L IS VCM prime lens thinking that I could use it for street photography and macro photography. Well, I was wrong, while it will be great for street photography, photojournalism and video work it is not optimized for macro photography. Therefore now I'm thinking of just getting the canon RF 100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM prime lens as it is a premium macro lens with 1.4 magnification, optical image stabilization and exceptional sharpness, a golden top drawer lens for macro photography and it's also a fantastic lens for portraits.  I can always use my RF 15-35mm f2.8 L IS USM lens for street photography and astrophotography it's a fantastic lens for both.  With the addition of the new prime lens,  I'll have all of my interst covered.  What do you all think?  Your thoughts and critiques are welcomed.

[rs-eos]

Agree that having that extra versatility with a lens is very nice.

Just curious, do you like the look of a 100mm for portraits? You may find that you prefer say 85mm or even longer focal lengths.

[JFG]

Hi Ricky,

Truthfully, I have never used a RF100mm prime lens for portraits and mostly use my RF24-105mm or RF15-35mm f2.8 for that purpose, so I really don't have a point of reference. The main reason why I'm thinking of the RF100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM lens is because it's the golden lens for Macro photography and it's reviewed as a great lens for portraits. Actually, this will be my first prime RF lens. When comparing stats of both lenses, I found that the RF100mm f2.8 Macro L IS USM offers an incredible 1.4x magnification, while the RF85mm f2 Macro IS STM, only offers a 0.5x magnification which means that subjects won't appear as large as they would appear with a true 1:1 macro lens like the RF100mm f2.8 Macro L IS USM.  Also, with the RF100mm f2.8 Macro I won't have to get so close to the subject, unlike with the RF85mm f2 Macro I will have to get fairly close.  And the RF100mm f2.8 Macro has a Spherical Aberration Control Ring: While primarily for portraits to adjust bokeh and soft focus, it may be good for finding creative uses in controlling the background blur around insects.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that the RF100mm f2.8 Macro has greater versatility for macro and portrait photography.  The RF85mm f2 Macro IS STM is also a versatile lens and popular choice for portraits and close-up-photography, that offers f2 aperture which is brighter than the f2.8, and image stabilization (IS).  However, the versatility of the RF85 f2 is not what I'm looking for.  I look forward to reading your opinion and thank you for your thought provocative post, as it made me think and further compare specs. 

[shadowsports]

Joe,

I have not used my RF100 for portraits.  From a macro standpoint, it's a boss.

Unbelievable sharpness and clarity, plus the optimal magnification ratio.  When you shoot video you can use the 1-3x magnifier if you want to shoot bugs.  For stills, It has a spherical aberration adjustment that allows you to shift the entire lens group fore or aft to enhance or diffuse the detail of bokeh.  

I've always shot portraits with an 85 mm.  I never replaced my EF version, and passed on the RF135 after purchasing the RF100.  I know Ricky uses a RF135 quite a bit.  He has also done detailed comparisons (for portraiture) with his lenses.  The RF85 f1.2 is also a prized lens for portraiture, but it doesn't IS.  

[rs-eos]

Yea, I did an exercise long ago on which focal length I preferred for headshots. That turned out to be 135mm so picked up the EF version at the time, then moved to the RF version when going mirrorless.

The 135mm also allowed me to not have to set up very wide backdrops in my basement studio area. Due to the narrower angle-of-view as compared to say 85mm, I could make use of 53 inch wide backdrops with no issues.

The working distance is longer though if wanting half-body, three-quarter or especially full body. A 100mm would be quite close to an 85mm in that respect.

[JFG]

Hi Ricky,

I agree with you that "The working distance is longer though if wanting half-body, three-quarter or especially full body a100mm would be quite close to an 85mm in that respect."   The main reason for my going with the RF100mm f2.8 L Macro is to use it for macro photography, and it's the best for that.  The lens is primarily designed as a macro lens, but the fact that it doubles as a capable portrait photography lens is a plus, and just what I was looking for.   If I was going strictly for portrait photography, I would probably go with a RF85mm f1.2 L or the RF135 f1.8 L (more than likely an RF135mm f1.8 L lens).  Ricky, I really appreciate your input based on your knowledge for different focal lengths.  It really helps me to understand that for portrait photography, the RF100mm f2.8 L Macro may not be the best choice, however it is also a great choice for portrait photography.  We know that it is the cat's meow for macro photography.  Having said that here are the pros and cons of the RF100mm Ff2.8 L Macro IS USM lens for portrait photography.

      Pros:   

• Excellent Sharpness - It delivers pin-sharp rendering, making it ideal for capturing fine details in portraits.
• Flattering Focal Length - the 100mm focal length provides natural compression, helping to create pleasing facial proportions.
• Effective Image Stabilization - With up to 8 stops of stabilization on compatible bodies like the R6 and R5, it helps to reduce motion blur when shooting handheld.
• Fast and Accurate Auto Focus - the lens works well with eye-detection AF, ensuring sharp focus on subjects.
• Great Bokeh - The spherical aberration (SA) control ring allow for adjustments to the bokeh, giving portraits a dreamy, soft-focus effects.

Cons:

• Limited Maximum Aperture - While f2.8 is decent, it's not as wide as f1.2 or f1.4 or f1.8, which offer even stronger subject isolation.
• Potential Focus Shift - Some users report focus shift when adjusting the aperture at very close distances.
• SA Control Can Be Gimmicky - While the SA control ring is fun, it may not be practical for all pictures.
• Not Compatible with Teleconverters - Unlike the EF version, this RF lens does not support teleconverters, limiting its versatility.

Overall, it makes a great dual-purpose macro and portrait lens.

😉

[JFG]

Hi Rick,

You need to take some portraits with your RF100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM lens and post them so that I can check them out and also take some with your RF85mm f1.2 L IS USM lens to compare.  I can see why you use your RF85mm f1.2 lens for portraits instead of the RF100 f2.8 L Macro.  The RF85mm f1.2 L IS USM and the RF85mm f1.2 L IS USM DS are considered the absolute best lenses for portraits on the Canon RF system.

I look forward to looking at your portraits comparing the RF100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM and your RF85mm f1.2 L IS USM lenses.

😁

[p4pictures]

It seems from the following posts that macro is the priority, portraits second and street is further down the order. 

The RF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM lens is the best RF macro lens in the line up today. I've used it and it is sharp as a tack and focuses fast too. 

I have owned the RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM lens, and it was super sharp and great for portraits, and that was my priority. Indoors in the UK we often have smaller buildings so the shorter working distance of an 85mm is helpful over the 100mm and 135mm alternatives. Ultimately I got rid of the RF 85mm F2 and bought an EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM lens. This is because I found the RF lens was exceptionally fragile and mine went back to Canon UK for three replacement aperture assemblies in the first 12 months. 

I do have the EF 135mm f/2L USM lens and it's a favourite in my bag for outdoor portraits. I have thought about updating to the RF 135mm F1.8L IS USM, but currently it's not a priority and also it's a bit larger than the old EF version.

I was intrigued by your idea that the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM lens could be used with extenders, and since I have that lens and an EF 1.4x Extender Mk III I tried, and can confirm that the extender does not physically fit in the macro lens as the front of the extender touches the rear element of the macro lens before you can interlock the two mounts. 

[JFG]

Hi Brian, 

Thank you for your response, and input about using extender with the RF100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM lens and confirming that it can't be used with macro lenses.  I also checked with a friend's RF100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM lens and got the same results as you.  Macro lenses like the RF100mm f2.8 Macro L IS USM and the EF version have optical designs that will not support extenders.  I guess, extenders are typically designed for telephoto lenses.  After further research, I found that instead of extenders, one can use extension tubes to increase magnification beyond the 1.4x native capabilities of the RF100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM lens.   Although canon does not currently offer RF extension tunbes, there are third-party options like "Fotodiox Pro Automatic Macro Extension Tubes".  The Fotodiox Pro 15mm Automatic Designed for Canon RF-mount cameras, allows for closer focusing distances without optical degradation. Unlike teleconverters, extension tubes don't contain optics,  they simply increase the distance between the lens and the sensor, allowing for closer focusing and higher magnification.  They are great alternatives that allow pushing the limits of the RF100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM.  However, there are some drawbacks like:   Loss of infinity focus -The lens will only focus at closer distance.   Potential light loss - Depending on the tube length, you might need to compensate with a higher aperture or higher ISO.  Autofocus Performance - Autofocus may slow down or become unreliable, so manual focus is often preferred.   Hopefully, Canon will soon make extension tunbes.

🤔