Canon Macro Lens

[drk75]

Hi every body,
This is my first post so please be gentle (hehe)
Been using a Canon 50mm Macro on a 1000D ( Enjoy the details of flowers and maybe some bugs) now i want to upgrade to the 100mm, beside price is there much of a differnece between the IS L and the standard 100mm lens most of my shots are hand held, so Im sorta leaning towards the IS. Also I keep looking at the Sigma 150mm Macro, there is a new 150mm on Sigmas site but no price. What are your thoughts on the 3.

Thanks for your time, and apologies if this question has been asked before.

[in2fx]

I have never used the L version, but I am VERY happy with the speed of focus if used on AF and the sharpness of the standard 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

[Captured frame]

Have just bought the Canon standard 100mm f2.8 USM Macro and I am also very impressed with it`s speed of focus and sharpness, also is very good for portraits as well.

[pgbphotographytas]

I also have this lens and am very pleased with it.

Paul

[agb]

I hope we are allowed to post links.
Nardes on this page has a ripper of a shot with the 100mm f2.8 macro.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=799284&page=25

[soulman]

I have the new one, which is undoubtedly one of Canon's sharpest lenses, though I understand that the older model is not far behind it. Something to remember with the IS on the new one is that it does not correct for backward & forward movement, which is a very easy way to get way out of focus when shooting macro. I don't know anything about the Sigma, but could imagine it being inconveniently long on a crop body. The non L Canon seems like it is probably the best value for money to me, but the new one is wonderful if you can afford the best.

[Arg]

If you can afford either, I cannot imagine a reason not to buy the IS 'L'. I love mine. The IS gives it more flexibility as a lens shooting hand held portraits and even as a low light lens.

[drk75]

Thanks for your help guys, looks like the IS L version.
Those photos are amazing.

Thanks again.

[Tricky]

Another option to consider... get the 100mm non-L lens and use the money saved to pair it up with an MT-14 or MT-24 macro flash. Personally I found that the move to a macro flash was a much bigger step forward than my move from a 60mm macro to 100mm L IS macro.

That said, the 100 L IS is a superb lens... so wouldn't blame you for buying one!

[rwg717]

If you can afford either, I cannot imagine a reason not to buy the IS 'L'. I love mine. The IS gives it more flexibility as a lens shooting hand held portraits and even as a low light lens.

Yes, I'm of the same opinion, if your interested the EF 100 f2.8L also makes an absolutely brilliant portrait lens, and yes the IS is awful handy;)
Richard