Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM
Your purchases support this site
Buy the Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM
- Amazon for US$499.00
- Adorama for US$499.00
- B&H Photo for US$499.00 Buy here to enter drawing this month for $500 Gift Card
Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM User Reviews
10 out of 10 points and recommended by sonylover1 (5 reviews)A true gem! Sharp wide open. Small.Prone to flares wide open...
This is my favourite astrophotolens.reviewed August 8th, 2012 (purchased for $300)
And I use it with success photographing babys in low light situation.
You can use in streetphoto without people realising you in fact are zomming in with a 160 mm equivalent mount on a 7D.
10 out of 10 points and recommended by MalteR (4 reviews)super sharp, fast, nice Bokehnone
I bought this one as a portrait lens capable of producing some kind of ´medium format look´, working with a very selective sharpness wide open. I wasn´t disappointed, this one is perfect for shooting people wide open and creating effects of totally blurred out-of-focus areas. The nice Bokeh and the ´clean´ overall-image might have helped to forget my Hasselblad.reviewed January 4th, 2010 (purchased for $490)
But is does more than that: I found it to be the sharpest tele lens in my lineup, great for architecture and landscape shots, street photography, whereever you need such a 100m. The AF is extremely fast and accurate. Even its behaviour when shooting available light situations is great, although one might wish to have an IS system on board.
Nevertheless from an optical point of view the best lens i own.
10 out of 10 points and recommended by rfwilliams (3 reviews)Sharp wide openNone for the price
I bought this lens on ebay and expected to get what I paid for. Man, I got lucky! This thing is tack sharp @f/2.2 and sharp enough @f/2.0.reviewed August 7th, 2009 (purchased for $300)
I liked this one so much, I bought the twin sister - 85mm f/1.8 USM. While the 85mm is a really nice lens, I prefer the 100mm because of the consistent sharp pictures I am able to get.
If there is a con to this lens, it would be that 15mm down you have the 85mm f/1.8 and 35mm up you have the 135mm f/2.0. Then on the other hand, if you need a lens in those focal ranges, maybe the 100mm f/2.0 is a good compromise?
10 out of 10 points and recommended by Levshin (1 reviews)all !hahaha...
135 f/2L? Well is not present...reviewed June 6th, 2007 (purchased for $380)
Hey! Buy better 100mm f/2, or 135mm f/2.8 – economy in 2,5-3 times! And it is even better 100mm f/2.8 macro – and will kill two hares one shot.
You will often use f/2? When depth of sharpness – centimeter?
I photograph 100мм f/2. The open diaphragm – 0,01 % of my photos.
On f/4-f/5.6 all these lenses give similar quality, absolutely!
Then what for to pay it is more?
Canon 100mm f/2 USM – a lens of a extra-class! From f/2.8 quality – is magnificent, with 4.0 – is phenomenal!
The price - yammy-yammy!
The only thing that can prevent to receive to you qualitative shots – mistakes of an auto focus... Watch it!
With the camera 400D, with the built in flash, I click this lens from 15-20 meters on ISO400 and with f/4.0 – quality completely arranges me! Canon Speedlight 580EX – bye-bye!
Today I would buy Canon 100mm f/2.8 to have an opportunity macrophotos, but at all I do not regret about the present lens!
Pleasant weight in hands... The compact sizes... Fine appearance on a camera... The contrast, detailed pictures... The sense of reliability of a design is supported by black color of a covering...
Use fixing a mirror for reduction of effect of the greased shots! It is a telephotolens, the image already noticeably shivers!
Very much, it is very happy with this lens!
135 f/2L - a lens for photoaesthetes! But if you the photo – 100mm f/2 – a fine choice interests only!
10 out of 10 points and recommended by amk (6 reviews)Sharp throughout and the focus is fastnone
Can't say anything bad about this lens. The only thing it's missing is the red line around the rim... and the dust/moisture seal that comes with it.reviewed January 10th, 2007 (purchased for $370)
9 out of 10 points and recommended by Lee Jay (16 reviews)Light, small, cheap, good optics, very fast focusingNo IS
A wonderful little lens with very few downfalls. I sold mine because I needed IS more than the extra stop in this range, but I'd still recommend the 100/2 to whomever needs this particuar capability.reviewed January 7th, 2007 (purchased for $370)
9 out of 10 points and recommended by photogjack (9 reviews)very sharp, focuses quickly, nice build qualitynone
This is a great lens. On full frame it is a great portrait lens. It is a nice walk around lens in cities or crowded environments (markets and the like), it give you a nice working distance from your subject. Image quality is excellent, it is a very nice match for the 28mm f1.8.reviewed December 8th, 2006 (purchased for $350)
10 out of 10 points and recommended by Tomti75 (13 reviews)Fast, sharp, light weight, pricenot really...
This lens is really up to what people say about it...reviewed December 4th, 2006 (purchased for $400)
I use it on a 350D (Rebel XT), as a short tele mostly for indoor (tight) portraits, outdoor portraits, and concerts pictures. It is also funny to use for compressed perspective landscapes and sunsets.
The background blur is very nice for portraits, and the subject isolation at f2 is great.
Maybe it's something personal, but I like the focal length very much. I always found 135 mm a little short in my SLR days, so the 160mm equiv. field of view on the 350D is great.
The lens is very sharp wide open, and it gets even a little better when stopping down (but honestly pixel peeping is required to see the difference).
Colors are great, but on high contrast zones, CA (purple fringing) can be seen wide open. It disappears when stopping down, and compared to the 85 1.8, the 100 is better for CA, but still not perfect on this particular point.
The lens is very compact and gives a perfect balance on the 350D, which is great given the equiv. focal length. It really doesn't feel like a tele.
Bottom line, it's close to perfection, and considering the price, let's say "perfect" !
I hesitated with the 135 f2, which is apparently better wide open, and gives less CA, but dropped it because it's more than twice the price, and because of its size and weight (70% heavier and 50% longer)
9 out of 10 points and recommended by cjbowlsby (17 reviews)size, weight, construction, optical quality, brightness, sharpnessumm... no weather sealing? No macro.
Love love love love love this lens.reviewed November 21st, 2006 (purchased for $380)
Almost makes me want to switch to primes entirely.
What surprised me first about this lens was how sharp it looked, JUST THROUGHT THE VIEWFINDER. I've been pleased and displeased with how things look through a lens before, but this blew my socks off.
After using a friends for a while, I tried out the 100mm 2.0 and 135L 2.0 and found the 100mm a bit more useable indoors on a 1.6x crop sensor. The 135L gets a little long.
Perfect for portraits and candids. So inconspicuous compared to my 70-200IS, and every bit as sharp. And it cost about a quarter as much!
True, I'd like to be able to focus closer, than 3 feet, but that's what you pay for a 2.0 versus the 2.8 macro. I just really needed it as bright as I could get it.
9 out of 10 points and recommended by shay (2 reviews)Sharp, Beautiful bokeh, Fast focusHaven't found any yet
Excellent. Very sharp even at wide open. Great bokeh. Prefect for head portraits.reviewed October 29th, 2006
My new love..
10 out of 10 points and recommended by fanzler (3 reviews)
Do not try to use it! You'll become a hopeless addict. This lens makes better images than its Big Brother the 135/2L does - I believe.reviewed October 1st, 2006