Forums Latest Members
  1. robrom Oct 18, 2017

    Posts
    16
    Likes
    10
    hey all

    First time posting in this section.

    I'm looking for a new lens to shoot watches. Has anyone tried/tested/got the
    Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM

    Keen to hear some thoughts on this. Even if I can't use it well it will make me look good
     
  2. No.15 Oct 23, 2017

    Posts
    380
    Likes
    1,295
    When I had a Canon body I used that lens all the time. I have taken some pretty good shots with it. I used it in my "apple" phase long time ago.
    I did this as a project.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    ANALOGUE, tikkathree, Seaman and 17 others like this.
  3. Ziololli Nov 6, 2017

    Posts
    25
    Likes
    30
    Stunning
     
  4. panaitchrono Nov 6, 2017

    Posts
    264
    Likes
    142
    Very nice apple pictures..really stunning.
     
  5. gnuyork Nov 14, 2017

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    497
    I've never used the L version, but the non L version is a great lens too.
     
  6. any4xx Nov 14, 2017

    Posts
    256
    Likes
    283
    Can never go wrong with any “L” lens from them. That said, I had one and the equivalent non-L model. I could never tell the difference in real life other than the price and the pretty red ring.
     
  7. Bayreuther Jan 11, 2018

    Posts
    24
    Likes
    129
    Get the L-version if you need the image stabilization. Both versions of the lens are pretty cheap. I have the L and have no regrets.
    Both lenses are super, also for normal use, portraits etc.
     
    tikkathree likes this.
  8. Deafboy His Holiness Puer Surdus Jan 11, 2018

    Posts
    1,973
    Likes
    5,344
    Very nice apple pictures!

    I wonder if such a lens is the best choice for taking pictures of watches. The focal length being long the depth of field will be very shallow. A lot of the watch will be out of focus. If that effect is what one is looking for then fine. Reducing the aperture helps in increasing the depth of field but a good cell phone camera (which have a very short focal length lens (ie. 4.2mm) will probably produce much sharper pictures overall.

    There is this neat calculator for calculating depth of field. Plug in a few numbers and notice the effect.
     
    Edited Jan 11, 2018
  9. Vanallard Jan 11, 2018

    Posts
    1,192
    Likes
    4,054
    The clarity and detail (especially the second picture) is very impressive :thumbsup:
     
  10. JimInOz іди нахуй Jan 11, 2018

    Posts
    12,976
    Likes
    25,979
    I think the 100mm would be an overkill for your stated purpose (watch pics). I use an EF-S 60mm f2.8 Macro USM lens and it gives good results.

    Originally I tried a 100mm lens but focusing was fiddly and the lens was very heavy and needed a tripod mount and a focus rail so I sold it and got the 60mm which I'm quite happy with.

    A review of the 60mm here is interesting.

    https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-60mm-f-2.8-Macro-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
     
  11. strick9 Jan 20, 2018

    Posts
    1,117
    Likes
    9,222
    I shoot Nikon my main lens AF-S NIKKOR 24-85MM 1:3.5-4:5 ED glass got that lens a few months ago it's big glass and great portrait lens. My back up Is a cannon I would gladly use L glass on it if it was the main camera L glass is awesome. Been shooting Nikon forever and even my old glass fits my camera
     
  12. Florin Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    26
    Likes
    58
    Great shots
     
  13. ag986 Mar 9, 2018

    Posts
    915
    Likes
    10,890
    It's the lens that I enjoy the most!
     
  14. Gbhulk May 14, 2018

    Posts
    158
    Likes
    31
    That doesn’t seem possible , great pic
     
  15. Seaman Jun 1, 2018

    Posts
    239
    Likes
    459
    Ok..I don't think it's all about the lens. I think I have good lens (AF-S Micro Nikkor 105mm 1:2.8 G ED VR) and I am not even close from a picture like that. So what else do we need? More knowledge or other equipment?

     
  16. eugeneandresson 'I used a hammer, a chisel, and my fingers' Jun 2, 2018

    Posts
    4,480
    Likes
    12,576
    :thumbsup:
     
  17. ANALOGUE Jun 2, 2018

    Posts
    548
    Likes
    5,290
    Wow! Nice :)
     
  18. w154 Jun 2, 2018

    Posts
    2,317
    Likes
    4,884
    I’ll just add a comment to this. If you have a camera with a full-size sensor (what Nikon call FX) then then the 55-60mm macro lens are probably not as good as the 100-105mm lenses, but if you have a reduced sensor size (like my Nikon D90 which is DX) then the 55-60mm lenses work really well.

    If you’re on a budget then I’ve had some luck with the old Nikon 55mm AIS which cost under 100 euros. You’ll need a tripod and you’ll need to fiddle a bit with shutter speeds as everything including metering is manual, but results can be good enough. For a bit more maybe get the more modern AF versions as they’ll focus twice as close (1:1 instead of 2:1), but you’ll only need that if you want super close-up details of dial, movement, etc rather than a whole watch head, and you can always crop from a wider shot and I’d say it’s good enough.

    Nikon D90, 55mm AIS, mounted on tripod
    F00845CB-9928-41F9-8365-1E2D32172419.jpeg

    Crop from above picture
    781AC079-7D27-487B-A350-BCF26425531A.jpeg
     
    Edited Jun 2, 2018
    Deafboy likes this.