Canon RF 100mm F2.8L MACRO IS USM Official Image Thread

[Mr Roboto]

Anyone who has this lens and used it with the Raynox DCR-250, can you comment on the maximum magnification achieved?

I had to look up what that is. A supplemental (i.e. close-up) lens.
I'm always touting using extension tubes because they are universal and don't introduce more lens elements which always degrades the image. Tubes are cheaper too!

Do you have a specific subject matter in mind to shoot? I can put up some examples of this lens with different extension tubes if you'd like.

 

[Lester Wareham]

I had to look up what that is. A supplemental (i.e. close-up) lens.
I'm always touting using extension tubes because they are universal and don't introduce more lens elements which always degrades the image. Tubes are cheaper too!

Do you have a specific subject matter in mind to shoot? I can put up some examples of this lens with different extension tubes if you'd like.

As a lighter weight alternative to using my MP-65 mm and a motorised focus rail and rail power bank in the field (mass budget + 3Kg excluding the obligatory geared head); is using the 100mm macro classic with 68 mm of tubes and the DCR-250, the former gives me 5x and the latter 3.5-3.7x. but using the Canon focus bracket feature.

The use-case is Slime Mould fruiting bodies (sporangia), the are about 1-2mm high typically, so the 3.5x solution is just about usable. The 5x is optimal although 10x would be better (but not in the field).

So I wondering if the RF version would give more magnification but would also need RF extermination tubes also.

 

[Mr Roboto]

As a lighter weight alternative to using my MP-65 mm and a motorised focus rail and rail power bank in the field (mass budget + 3Kg excluding the obligatory geared head); is using the 100mm macro classic with 68 mm of tubes and the DCR-250, the former gives me 5x and the latter 3.5-3.7x. but using the Canon focus bracket feature.

The use-case is Slime Mould fruiting bodies (sporangia), the are about 1-2mm high typically, so the 3.5x solution is just about usable. The 5x is optimal although 10x would be better (but not in the field).

So I wondering if the RF version would give more magnification but would also need RF extermination tubes also.

Thank you for elaborating. Those are very small subjects indeed and I think you won't get the results you're looking for using the RF100+tubes (you will need a lot of extension).

You will get greater magnification using a shorter focal length lens (35mm or 50mm) for any given amount of extension. But the working distance will be extremely small.

 

[Mr Roboto]

Milkweed Leaf Beetle sheltering from the rain

 

[Lester Wareham]

Thank you for elaborating. Those are very small subjects indeed and I think you won't get the results you're looking for using the RF100+tubes (you will need a lot of extension).

You will get greater magnification using a shorter focal length lens (35mm or 50mm) for any given amount of extension. But the working distance will be extremely small.

Agreed, using tubes with the 100mm classic gives about 2:1, adding the closeup lens gets to ~3.5x.

I did a study of the focus bracketing feature with the naked lens (see resources forum) but not with focus aids.

An annoyance with the focus bracketing feature is you set the start distance, a step factor and the number of frames.

A focus rail is much easier, you set the start and stop distance, step size in um based on the magnification and set f-stop and the SW defines the number of frames. Much easier to be sure you covering the subject depth in the optimal number of frames.

A lot more hit and miss with the internal focus bracketing but a lot lighter.

 

[shinksma]

There is no thread for this lens in the Canon Lenses sub-forum, so this thread is my only place to ask questions. I'll gladly start one there, if this is getting too noisy and detracting away from the "Sample Images" nature of the thread.

I just back-ordered this through the Canon Refurb shop (yes, a rare event being able to back-order a refurb!). If using this lens outside in direct sun (or good indirect light) on a really close-in subject, how many of you find the lens hood to be an annoyance? Do you simply not use it and make sure the sun / lightsource is somewhere behind you to avoid glare and not have the hood scaring the insect / etc?

When I use my old EF 100mm (non-L, no IS) the hood is usually off for close-in work, but I'll put it on if I'm using it as an on-the-fly portrait lens - no, not a portrait of a fly, um, seat of the pants portrait? No, I'm not taking photos of people's butts. Oh, you know what I mean...

I don't use a light ring or other supplemental lighting; I'm usually just looking for candid, well-lit shots of interesting critters and textures.

I assume this lens has a slight bigger lens hood, because the front element / filter size is bigger (67mm filter on the RF vs 58mm for my old EF). Though, to be honest, looking at the product images on Canon's website the RF hood looks "shorter" (but wider, so maybe same "height"?)

Maybe I should go check out the general Macro areas for more tips and tricks.

 

[Mr Roboto]

There is no thread for this lens in the Canon Lenses sub-forum, so this thread is my only place to ask questions. I'll gladly start one there, if this is getting too noisy and detracting away from the "Sample Images" nature of the thread.

I just back-ordered this through the Canon Refurb shop (yes, a rare event being able to back-order a refurb!). If using this lens outside in direct sun (or good indirect light) on a really close-in subject, how many of you find the lens hood to be an annoyance? Do you simply not use it and make sure the sun / lightsource is somewhere behind you to avoid glare and not have the hood scaring the insect / etc?

When I use my old EF 100mm (non-L, no IS) the hood is usually off for close-in work, but I'll put it on if I'm using it as an on-the-fly portrait lens - no, not a portrait of a fly, um, seat of the pants portrait? No, I'm not taking photos of people's butts. Oh, you know what I mean...

I don't use a light ring or other supplemental lighting; I'm usually just looking for candid, well-lit shots of interesting critters and textures.

I assume this lens has a slight bigger lens hood, because the front element / filter size is bigger (67mm filter on the RF vs 58mm for my old EF). Though, to be honest, looking at the product images on Canon's website the RF hood looks "shorter" (but wider, so maybe same "height"?)

Maybe I should go check out the general Macro areas for more tips and tricks.

The hood isn't unusually deep for a 100mm lens:


But I never use the hood. I shoot everything with ambient lighting from every direction and never had a problem.
Then again, I rarely use hoods on any of my lenses unless it is raining or snowing.

Hope your lens arrives soon. I think you'll love it!

 

[shinksma]

Hope your lens arrives soon. I think you'll love it!

Thanks! It shipped before the day was over - which is faster than when they have stuff in stock, sometimes! Should be here Monday.

But I never use the hood. I shoot everything with ambient lighting from every direction and never had a problem.
Then again, I rarely use hoods on any of my lenses unless it is raining or snowing.

Ah, OK. I like to use hoods to reduce lens flare on sunny days, especially when using walk-around lenses. But not as much on the macro lens, as I explained.

A slightly different topic: My EF 100mm 2.8 macro has a (3rd-party) tripod mount ring/foot, and it does seem to help, because the lens is front heavy using the body mount on a smaller APS-C body like my old T3i or the R7s we now have.

Do you use a tripod mount ring to help shift weight balance? I see one is available from Canon (and probably 3rd party) for the RF 100mm 2.8 L macro.

 

[Mr Roboto]

Thanks! It shipped before the day was over - which is faster than when they have stuff in stock, sometimes! Should be here Monday.


Ah, OK. I like to use hoods to reduce lens flare on sunny days, especially when using walk-around lenses. But not as much on the macro lens, as I explained.

A slightly different topic: My EF 100mm 2.8 macro has a (3rd-party) tripod mount ring/foot, and it does seem to help, because the lens is front heavy using the body mount on a smaller APS-C body like my old T3i or the R7s we now have.

Do you use a tripod mount ring to help shift weight balance? I see one is available from Canon (and probably 3rd party) for the RF 100mm 2.8 L macro.

Can't help you with that one. I can't recall the last time I used a tripod for macros in the field - that's how little I use them. Once in a while for landscapes or for still-lifes in a "studio" but otherwise I have 4 or 5 tripods sitting in the trunk, basement, or work office

 

[LoneRider]

Spring is on the way!

 

[shinksma]

Can't help you with that one. I can't recall the last time I used a tripod for macros in the field - that's how little I use them. Once in a while for landscapes or for still-lifes in a "studio" but otherwise I have 4 or 5 tripods sitting in the trunk, basement, or work office

OK, well that is actually inspirational, because I find tripods are really useful for subjects that don't move, but awkward otherwise. And most of the subjects I'm interested in move - insects, spiders, and other creepy-crawlies. So I have gotten most of my "good" (not necessarily great) macro shots handheld, and that's why I really wanted this macro lens that has IS - because using the non-IS EF 100mm macro is a real challenge!

 

[Lester Wareham]

There is no thread for this lens in the Canon Lenses sub-forum, so this thread is my only place to ask questions. I'll gladly start one there, if this is getting too noisy and detracting away from the "Sample Images" nature of the thread.

I just back-ordered this through the Canon Refurb shop (yes, a rare event being able to back-order a refurb!). If using this lens outside in direct sun (or good indirect light) on a really close-in subject, how many of you find the lens hood to be an annoyance? Do you simply not use it and make sure the sun / lightsource is somewhere behind you to avoid glare and not have the hood scaring the insect / etc?

When I use my old EF 100mm (non-L, no IS) the hood is usually off for close-in work, but I'll put it on if I'm using it as an on-the-fly portrait lens - no, not a portrait of a fly, um, seat of the pants portrait? No, I'm not taking photos of people's butts. Oh, you know what I mean...

I don't use a light ring or other supplemental lighting; I'm usually just looking for candid, well-lit shots of interesting critters and textures.

I assume this lens has a slight bigger lens hood, because the front element / filter size is bigger (67mm filter on the RF vs 58mm for my old EF). Though, to be honest, looking at the product images on Canon's website the RF hood looks "shorter" (but wider, so maybe same "height"?)

Maybe I should go check out the general Macro areas for more tips and tricks.

I sourced a hood for an EF-S 60mm macro to use on my 100 mm classic (same size filter thread). This allows reasonable subject natural lighting at 1:1 but with some protection from off axis glare.

 

[Dennis]

>snip

A slightly different topic: My EF 100mm 2.8 macro has a (3rd-party) tripod mount ring/foot, and it does seem to help, because the lens is front heavy using the body mount on a smaller APS-C body like my old T3i or the R7s we now have.

Do you use a tripod mount ring to help shift weight balance? I see one is available from Canon (and probably 3rd party) for the RF 100mm 2.8 L macro.

I purchased the very expensive Canon Tripod Collar for the RF 100mm F2.8L and compared to the Canon Tripod Collar for my EF 100mm F2.8L, it is a complete failure.

The RF version is very difficult to fit to the RF 100mm lens and once fitted, does not allow the lens to rotate compared to how easy the EF version is on the EF lens.

When I loosen the locking knob, the lens will just not budge no matter how much rotational force I apply to the lens. Further releasing the knob causes the collar to spring open. In short, what was delivered to me is useless and not fit for purpose.

I live in Australia, and it is not worth returning the collar to the US supplier.

Instead, I found a work around that is not perfect but at least provided the rotation. Here is a link to the website.

https://silencecorner.net/collections/atoll-series

It is bulkier than the Canon product and there is a tight fit for the Canon Release, but at least it allows the lens to rotate and there are 90 degree click stops.

I still sometimes use the Canon Collar if I want to take shots that do not require lens rotation, as it is more compact than the Atoll model that replaced it.

Another weird issue is that when mounted on the RF 100mm lens, the foot of the Canon RF 100mm Collar is not parallel to the optical axis of the lens, the two axes seem to converge.

The attached photos show 2 different Atoll Collars.

The larger one (black) does not cover the lens switches and also does not foul the remote release port.

Dennis.

EDIT:
Photo #1 is the Atoll Model.
Photo #2 is the NISI Model at:

NiSi WIZARD W-82M Camera Positioning Bracket for Mirrorless Compatible with Canon R Series

Buy NiSi WIZARD W-82M Camera Positioning Bracket for Mirrorless Compatible with Canon R Series direct from the official NiSi Filters Australia store. Free shipping on orders over $69.

nisifilters.com.au

 

[Mr Roboto]

I purchased the very expensive Canon Tripod Collar for the RF 100mm F2.8L and compared to the Canon Tripod Collar for my EF 100mm F2.8L, it is a complete failure.

The RF version is very difficult to fit to the RF 100mm lens and once fitted, does not allow the lens to rotate compared to how easy the EF version is on the EF lens.

When I loosen the locking knob, the lens will just not budge no matter how much rotational force I apply to the lens. Further releasing the knob causes the collar to spring open. In short, what was delivered to me is useless and not fit for purpose.

I live in Australia, and it is not worth returning the collar to the US supplier.

Instead, I found a work around that is not perfect but at least provided the rotation. Here is a link to the website.

https://silencecorner.net/collections/atoll-series

It is bulkier than the Canon product and there is a tight fit for the Canon Release, but at least it allows the lens to rotate and there are 90 degree click stops.

I still sometimes use the Canon Collar if I want to take shots that do not require lens rotation, as it is more compact than the Atoll model that replaced it.

Another weird issue is that when mounted on the RF 100mm lens, the foot of the Canon RF 100mm Collar is not parallel to the optical axis of the lens, the two axes seem to converge.

The attached photos show 2 different Atoll Collars.

The larger one (black) does not cover the lens switches and also does not foul the remote release port.

Dennis.

View attachment 145958

View attachment 145959

Very nice setups, Dennis! Thanks for sharing these tips

 

[Mr Roboto]

OK, well that is actually inspirational, because I find tripods are really useful for subjects that don't move, but awkward otherwise. And most of the subjects I'm interested in move - insects, spiders, and other creepy-crawlies. So I have gotten most of my "good" (not necessarily great) macro shots handheld, and that's why I really wanted this macro lens that has IS - because using the non-IS EF 100mm macro is a real challenge!

The IS on the 100mm macros (both EF and RF) is a complete "game changer" IMO.

I had the EF180mm f/3.5L very early on and I thought it would be buried with me when I died. But once I got the IS equipped 100mm, it didn't take long for me to sell the 180mm.

Not because I could be sloppy by not using a tripod, but because the IS allows me to be quicker and get into tight spaces.
Besides, in-situ at high magnifications, gentle breezes can become a bigger negative factor than hand-holding. There were times when I had to rock in concert with a swaying critter to try to get a shot.

 

[Mr Roboto]

If anyone wants to try out a tripod collar on the cheap, check this out:

A Very Inexpensive Collar

Good reviews. Free returns.
Very little to lose

 

[Lester Wareham]

It is a bit odd a L series macro lens not being sold with a tripod collar; surprised that it sounds poorly designed.

Such an essential thing for so much macro work.

I guess Canon assume 90% of users will be using it handheld.

 

[West Coast Birder]

A macro lens is pretty small and light. Why not just add a tripod foot to the camera?

 

[Dennis]

A macro lens is pretty small and light. Why not just add a tripod foot to the camera?

Hi Sam

I sometimes use a Macro Focusing Rail and it is convenient to undo the lock knob and rotate the lens 90 deg for Portrait orientation.

This worked just fine with my previous Canon EF 100mm F2.8 and EF 100mm F2.8 L Macro lenses and their respective Canon OEM Collars, but the Canon OEM RF Collar delivered to me for the RF 100mm F2.8L does not allow rotation, it is jammed solid unless I completely release the collar and reposition the lens manually, then re-locate the lock knob, which from a work flow aspect is unacceptable.

I have read of another user experiencing the same issue, although I have not seen any widespread reporting on this, which makes me wonder whether it might be an early adopter batch related problem?

Dennis.

 

[West Coast Birder]

Hi Sam

I sometimes use a Macro Focusing Rail and it is convenient to undo the lock knob and rotate the lens 90 deg for Portrait orientation.

This worked just fine with my previous Canon EF 100mm F2.8 and EF 100mm F2.8 L Macro lenses and their respective Canon OEM Collars, but the Canon OEM RF Collar delivered to me for the RF 100mm F2.8L does not allow rotation, it is jammed solid unless I completely release the collar and reposition the lens manually, then re-locate the lock knob, which from a work flow aspect is unacceptable.

I have read of another user experiencing the same issue, although I have not seen any widespread reporting on this, which makes me wonder whether it might be an early adopter batch related problem?

Dennis.

Thanks for the explanation, Dennis. That makes sense.