Just got a Canon 100mm IS L macro. Now what?

[ScottyP]

It is winter so bugs are in short supply. I have a good tripod. I have only played a bit with it but it has fantastic bokeh for my girls' birthday cake in front of our Christmas tree.  :). 

Any my suggestions on how to dive in?

[RobertTheFat]

Well, Christmas tree ornaments are the first subject that comes to mind. But it's very late here, and I'm too sleepy to think clearly; so there are probably other obvious candidates that I didn't think of on the spur of the moment.

What made you decide to buy that lens? I've been eyeing it a bit recently myself. I'm not much of a macro photographer, but my wife has gotten a lot of good use out of her 60mm macro in the several years that she's had it. The 100mm L should be even better, and I bet you'll really enjoy it, once you've worked it into your routine. Be sure to let us know how it goes.

[TTMartin]

Digital Photography School has a good article on 'How to Photograph Snowflakes with a DSLR' by Don Komarechka.

You might want to Google it. GAS Warning! The article suggests buying extension tubes to get beyond 1:1 macro photography..

[RobertTheFat]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

Digital Photography School has a good article on 'How to Photograph Snowflakes with a DSLR' by Don Komarechka.

You might want to Google it. GAS Warning! The article suggests buying extension tubes to get beyond 1:1 macro photography..

---

I almost suggested snowflakes myself, but feared (rightly, I guess) that they might require equipment beyond merely an excellent macro lens.

[ScottyP]

I like the snowflakes idea.  I will look into that, and into extension tubes too, I guess.  G.A.S. indeed.

So far it has proven useful getting my daughter's birthday cake photo.  I wanted to get the christmas tree behind her to show large bokeh balls, so I needed a longer lens than my 35mm, but I also needed it to focus closer than my 70-200 wanted to focus there at the table.  Third time was the charm, and the macro lens worked great.

[ebiggs1]

Scott, 

Just because it has the word 'macro' in its name does not mean it won't do a great job at everything else.  When I had mine I used it a lot for things that are not macro.

I assume you got the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens ?  If this is the one you got it is not just good it is fantastic.

If you got the non-IS version that's OK, too because the IS doesn't work well in macro.  But for everything else this lens is a s good as it gets.  You need to put it to use for things like portrits and such.  Medium tele things, etc.

I am a big fan of the Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM Lens but the 100mm L may have even better IQ.  Maybe the best macro made! (IMHO, of course )

 Manual focus at distance is tricky but let it AF and it is quick and spot on. (IS works great at distance)

[RobertTheFat]

I get the impression that Ernie approves of Scott's choice. 

[ebiggs1]

Hey, I try to tell it like it is.  If it is good, fine.  But if it is junk, well that, too.

As for myself, I have sold most of the lenses I had.  The big reason is the  EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM L and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lenses.  Once you get these two gems, you really need very little else.  This is from a a guy that tried most of the other options.  In other words the expensive way.

Guys that say a zoom can't be as sharp as a prime don't have the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM L.

I do have a few other "must have" lenses. The Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM and the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Lenses.  But this is because of their huge apertures of f1.2.

I shot a school event last evening that had to work.  No excuses!  What went with me? The 1Ds Mk III along with my 1D Mk IV and the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM L with its big brother EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM.  I find myself winding up with that combo so much, why keep all the other lenses just sitting in my re- purposed darkroom?

Caveat, I did take my Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens, too, but found it was a bit too long for the venue.  Not to mention, it was pretty slow.

[Mitsubishiman]

I will agree with Ebiggs on the 100 mm, I have that same lens, and it is much more than just a macro lens, I also have the 16-35 L series, incredible differnce in quality, for me it will be L Series only for any future purchases.

[TCampbell]

I wish I could find the article... but about a year ago I found an article that explained how to 'make' your own snowflakes.

The author wanted you to use a glass plate to collect the snowflakes but the plate needed to cool down (it needed to be out in the cold an hour or so before you go out to shoot because if you carry out a glass plate from your warm house the plate will immediately melt any snow on contact until that glass has a chance to cool down.)

They had you use a spray bottle capable of spraying a fine mist to spray the water (basically you are using it like a snow machine).   But there was a temperature at which it was finally cold enough that the water would be able to freeze and crystalize in the air before landing on your glass plate (and as I recall it was fairly cold... I think it had to be below 10ºF as temps merely in the teens were not yet quite cold enough to freeze the water vapor into snow before it hit the ground.)  10ºF is probably not the correct temperature -- I just recall that temps only slightly below freezing weren't cold enough... it had to be quite a bit colder for this to work.

Anyway, I found it interesting in that you don't necessarily have to wait for a snowstorm to photograph snowflakes... but you do have to wait for a sufficiently cold day.