100 vs 180 macro

[TitusvileSurfer]

I would like to compare the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro and EF 180mm f/3.5 L USM Macro lens before purchase. Please submit photos taken with either for comparison.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

Nobody? Oh well I'm pretty much set on the 100 anyway. I can't really imagine using a 180 on a 1.6 D40 but wanted to see it at least.

 

[Rosseau]

Check out pbase.com.

They have pictures uploaded from users which are organized by camera and lense.

100mm
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_100_28_macro_u

180mm
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_180_35_macro_u

I guess you're trading off maximum working distance and an f stop or two of aperture.

 

[Rosseau]

The 180mm seems pretty competent to me...

http://www.pbase.com/image/74397351

 

[BlueCorn]

Really the big difference is in working distance. Both are excellent lenses.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

Cool, thanks a bunch!

 

[MCary]

Both are great lens, it is exactly as Doug says. Working distance. Asking for a posted comparison is not going to help much. You need a high resolution calibrated monitor and a picture taken by a highly skilled photographer with minimal compression, taked of the same subject under the same conditions.

Mike

 

[gregr]

I've used both quite a bit and both are supremely sharp. Along with the working distance issue is another important consideration: the 180 is hard to use without a tripod- the 100 is a piece of cake handheld.