EF 100mm F 2.8 USM mistake ??!!

[myloplex]

I got this off photo.net:

"I´ve played with the USM version in a shop recently, plus I´ve looked at printed pictures of the USM version. In my opinion Canon has made a big mistake in the optical construction (or a bad compromise) - under certain circumstances there is a terrible or weird background blur (double line bokeh), eg. if you photograph a flower, the unsharp part of the flower´s stem may turn into a structure which looks like two stems. Disgusting. I´d go for the older version.
-- Tobias Mennle , August 17, 2003; 11:07 A.M. Eastern "

I know 100mm f2.8 is a really sharp lense but can anyone can testify to the above comment by that guy ?

[VincentLin]

Hi,

I have experienced the same phenomenon. Usually happens when you f/2.8 (I usually do f/2.8).

If you want, I can show you some slides with this problem.

The lens is best at f/8 to f/22.

Cheers!

[erwinx]

Originally Posted by myloplex I got this off photo.net: "I´ve played with the USM version in a shop recently, plus I´ve looked at printed pictures of the USM version. In my opinion Canon has made a big mistake in the optical construction (or a bad compromise) - under certain circumstances there is a terrible or weird background blur (double line bokeh), eg. if you photograph a flower, the unsharp part of the flower´s stem may turn into a structure which looks like two stems. Disgusting. I´d go for the older version. -- Tobias Mennle , August 17, 2003; 11:07 A.M. Eastern " I know 100mm f2.8 is a really sharp lense but can anyone can testify to the above comment by that guy ?

Look here:
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=44855
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=42309

various people tell you 180 f/3.5L better, why waste time with an ordinary non-L lens?

[VincentLin]

Originally Posted by erwinx Look here: http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=44855 http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=42309 various people tell you 180 f/3.5L better, why waste time with an ordinary non-L lens?

I beg to differ. L lens does not mean it is better.

[myloplex]

Originally Posted by VincentLin Hi, I have experienced the same phenomenon. Usually happens when you f/2.8 (I usually do f/2.8). If you want, I can show you some slides with this problem. The lens is best at f/8 to f/22. Cheers!

can see the pictures please : )

[myloplex]

Originally Posted by erwinx Look here: http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=44855 http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=42309 various people tell you 180 f/3.5L better, why waste time with an ordinary non-L lens?

brother I don't print money. Also at 180mm I read its hard to use handheld and usually a tripod is recommended..... 50mm too close ..100 mm is better

[oeyvind]

Nothing wrong with 100mm macro USM, here's two sample wide open at f/2.8:





Can't afford 180 L? Get the Sigma 180mm APO EX macro instead.

[VincentLin]

Originally Posted by myloplex can see the pictures please : )

I dun have a film scanner leh. If you wanna drop by my workplace, I can show you.

[Sgt. Pepper]

Originally Posted by erwinx various people tell you 180 f/3.5L better, why waste time with an ordinary non-L lens?

for Macro lens, L, Non-L or 3rd party doesnt matter, they are all built with optimum optical quality.

[Kho King]

get the Nikon AFD 105 micro then...