Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 11, 2005, 5:41 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I agree with you 110%. I have seen many,many great pics on different web sites from this lense. And I have read many personal reviews on this lense and users who swear by this lense. Optically this lense looks really good. But mechanically it needs a lot of improvement. I have been spoiled by my Tamron 28-75 2.8 and Sigma 100-300 f/4 speed,focus ability and quietness.I want to keep with that and not buy a lense that is going to aggrevate me in the field. I do not have a lot of patience and if I had ordered the 105 micro before I tried it and took it out in the field it would of ended up a permanent part of some tree or at the bottom of a lake. Again, I really like Sigma lenses, I now have three. 15-30 70-200 2.8 100-300 f4. I love them all. And especially my 28-75 2.8 Tamron. This lense is my favorite. But compared to these the 105 micro is really no good for me. The Canon I ordered may not be either, we will see.

And without starting another thread,mabey you can help me out with a question on my 100-300 f/4. For3 days in a row when I was shooting softball games my auto focus starting acting weird. From 100 to 200 it was fine. But from 200 to 300 it would not focus. The inner focus would just roll back and forth. Not a complete turn but just enough that the camera would not focus. It was about 90 degrees out side and the humidity was terrable. Do you think the lense or camera got to heated up? Since then it has been cooler here and I have not had anymore problems with it. Strange huh?

Thanks for your feedback.
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2005, 11:40 PM   #12
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

IMO macro lens in general are 'slower' because they need to resolve smaller distances -> You also want the AF ring to move in millimeters increments up close and not some larger units like on the longer zooms. Tripod also always helps in macro because the user/camera rocking back and forth motion can affect the AF greatly as well

As to the temperature most consumers electronics are only rated for 0-45C - This is mainly due to the components that theses devices use such as their processors/memories -> 90 ambient air is well below 113F, but remember their internal temperature can be higher especially when exposed to the sun (for example electronics are hotter inside a closed car - but theses devices are rated for industrial temp which is 85C).

Try your other lenses next time and see if the issue follows the lens or stays with the cameras... :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 2005, 1:12 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default

When I was going to get a 24-70L and 70-200L I made up my mind to get the Canon 50mm f/2.5 macro. I highly doubt I would have the need to go to lifesize so half-lifesize was going to be just fine. The lens has a rep for sharpness, contrast and focusing well. Also, it can be had new for about $230 or so. But, I didn't get the 70-200L to go along with my 24-70L, I got the 135L. Now, I am looking at the 100mm f2.8 macro because it would also fill a focal lenght gap.:?
csnudelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 2005, 5:22 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

The main reason I decided to go with the 100mm Canon was the USM. The only sigma lenses in there micro line up that has HSM is the 150mm and I think the 180mm but dont quote me on that. And those two lenses are to much for me when I am going to shoot micro. The Sigma 105mm auto focus was way to slow and iffy for me. I hope I made the right choice in the Canon. If I did not it will go back and I will try the Tamron 90mm next.
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 2005, 5:36 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

Hey, I got another question for you guys. Which ever lense I end up with, Canon,Sigma or Tamron, What are the chances of being able to use a Kenco exstension tube ( a 12 or 25 ) and also use my 1.4x TC with these lenses? I already know that the Canon 25 extender, The Sigma 105mm micro and 1.4x TC doesnt work very well. We put all of those together at Wolf Camera and it made my 20-D go nuts. But mabey with a Kenco 12 or 25 and the 1.4x TC it might work out with the Tamron or Canon. And if all else fails the Sigma 105. Whatca think?
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:15 AM.