On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:52:14 -0500 Bill Gillooly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Does anyone have an opinion on the merits of these two lenses: > EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro > EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM > > In terms of sharpness is the newer lens better? If you were going to > buy one or the other, is the newer lens worth the additional cost? > > Has anyone noticed a tendency to hunt for focus on the older lens? I > have one and in the same lighting, my EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro will > snap right into focus and the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro will miss and run > from one end of it's range to the other without ever hitting focus. > If I give it some help, by manually focusing, it usually snaps right > into focus. This sparked my original question as I wondered if the USM
> lens would do a better job and might be worth spending the money to > upgrade. Hi Bill, I used to own a non-USM 100, now I own the USM version. I feel that they are equally sharp. I never AFD'd with the older lens (macro only), so I can't comment on that. The USM lens is slow by ring-USM standards (and sometimes doesn't find the subject on the first try), but it has a lot of focus-travel to cover. Shooting from one long-distance subject to another, it's as fast as any other ring-USM lens (and never hunts). Other pluses: * it has full-time manual focusing * it has internal focusing * it can use a tripod collar The cost differential? ...The recent rebate covered that ;-) Dave Herzstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pixseal.com * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
