11-15-2012, 03:42 PM
Pages: 1 2
10-31-2013, 10:41 AM
And here for an even worse pic of my setup :p
![[Image: 2eFoMmq.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/2eFoMmq.jpg)
Canon 70d with MT-24EX & Stoffen diffusers
Canon 100mm f2.8 L Macro
![[Image: 2eFoMmq.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/2eFoMmq.jpg)
Canon 70d with MT-24EX & Stoffen diffusers
Canon 100mm f2.8 L Macro
10-31-2013, 04:28 PM
Nice you got the 100 L. How do you like it? Did you compare to the 100 2.8 non-L? Just curious. I have the old copy. Wondering is the IS is worth a move up ...
10-31-2013, 05:06 PM
joneill809 Wrote:Nice you got the 100 L. How do you like it? Did you compare to the 100 2.8 non-L? Just curious. I have the old copy. Wondering is the IS is worth a move up ...
Haven't compared it to the non L though I did try to find one.
The L having IS + going through lots of comparisons made me go for it in the end.
The IS is honestly almost like a thing of miracles when doing handheld macro.
When I first got it and experimented a bit (or by forgetting to turn IS back on after tripod usage

combined with 9 vs 8 aperture blades (bokeh!

If you're on some sort of a budget or need to prioritize it and (handheld) macro isnt all that important or mostly use a tripod anyway, i'd probably go with the non-L because when it comes to the TRUE essence (optics) there is not a lot in that price range that seems to be able to beat it.
That being said, i LOVE my 2.8L and would never trade it in for a standard one now that I have it

It pretty much depends on what you will be using it for although the IS definitely warrants a bit of the markup in price.
Pages: 1 2