Canon RF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM lens review with samples

[@FlosBlog]

Christopher: “When auto focusing the sharpness gets a bit worse” Me, watching at 360p: “Ah yes, quite pronounced”

[@Jawad.1]

🤣🤣

[@williamkapes5185]

Another excellent review Christopher!! I don’t often get a chance to comment on KZbin videos, but yours are so well done I thought I would take the time - I am an engineer and particularly appreciate your attention to detail and objective quantitative analysis. I also appreciate your subtle evangelism. Please continue your great work. Thanks again.

[@christopherfrost]

Thanks man! God bless.

[@kronusaerospace8872]

That focus shift test is a great way of holding canon's feet to the fire on this issue. Whilst not the end of the world, for a lens of this price it's not one that should be ignored.

[@mihugong3153]

Yeah, I really wonder how something like this happens. I mean, they did put quite some effort in these new RF lenses, they went much farther than just adapting the EF designs. So one would assume that a kind of conscious decision led to this. I'm no engineer, but it seems simple enough - the lens should shift always the same, depending on distance and aperture. Why not make it correct for this automatically?

[@darylcheshire1618]

The focus shift is a law of physics rather than a defect. The EF85mm f/1.2L uses a floating element (another lens) to mitigate it somewhat, but at extra cost. I don’t know if this would work in a macro lens. Like many things lens designers have to balance a bunch of trade-offs, including cost. The SA control is interesting. One of the trade-offs can be varied.

[@kronusaerospace8872]

@@darylcheshire1618 for a macro lens it's a deal breaker. The depth of field is so razor thin at macro distances that a slight shift can throw off your focus completely. You can deal with it for Work on a tripod, but as someone who regularly does live insect macro handheld at magnifications up to 5x, I would never even consider a lens that has focus shift. None of the macro lenses I have used have this issue so it's clear that, at the very least, canon made a poor set of tradeoffs. Atleast for people who do my kind of work.

[@ronrotunno2901]

Curios as I’m considering this lens; I always manually focus for macro (and would use this lens only for that purpose) so it appears that focus shift would not be an issue. Is that a correct assumption?

[@Dewabarasunderan]

​@@ronrotunno2901Why would you choose this over the laowa 90mm, if you only use manual focus?

[@tkarim]

I recently purchased this lens, and after about 200+ pictures, I do not see any focus shift issues. It’s actually one of the better RF lenses to date. Very contrasty, focus ring is super smooth, and AF is fantastic. The lens IS (when paired with my R6) is incredibly stable!

[@ralphsaad8637]

The focus shift is demonstrated in several reviews online. You probably can't see it because the drop in sharpness is mild starting f5.6, but it is there. Also, when shooting at infinity, which you will be doing for shots at f5.6, a mild shift in focus will most probably be hard to detect. Not to mention that at close focus or macro distances, you will probably be using manual focus anyway. So, not a huge deal but certainly an odd defect for a lens this expensive. I wish they would release soon a mark 2 of this lens without the SA control to avoid having any strange mechanism affecting the performance of the auto focus.

[@tkarim]

@@ralphsaad8637 a mark ii without SA control would be great. I will say that the RF 100mm Macro has the best focusing ring of any other RF lens. The amount of resistance is perfect!

[@disphoto]

Christopher: I have shot test patterns with my R5 and RF100f2.8L and I am NOT seeing the focus shifting. My procedure is to autofocus with back button focus and then take pictures varying the aperture with the Canon app on my phone. So the focus is not changed nor the camera touched between apertures. My test target is about 1 meter across horizontally and I adjust the tripod distance accordingly. IF anything, the image gets just a tad sharper at f4 and stays about the same at f5.6 and f8 both in the corners and in the center (at f2.8 it is extremely sharp, to begin with). I would be happy to share my raw files with you. I'm not being critical but recognize the limitations of only having one copy of each lens and camera. It appears your copy of one or the other is working differently than mine. On DPReview, there have been random reports of focus shifting when stopping down with other lenses but I have not seen any verification of this problem. I'm wondering if this is a copy variation problem. Also, with the lens focus shifting when stopping down, did you have to use "depth of field preview" or some other trick when focusing manually? It would seem if you focused without DOF preview, then you would get the same focus shift.

[@cerec69]

I won’t be trading my EF L Series version of this lens after watching this review. Saved me a pile of cash 💰👍🏻

[@haydennettleton3272]

Yes most of the EF L series lenses are already fantastic. I think the RF mount is a money grab from Canon. Basically paying almost twice as much for a lense you already own.

[@girnas89]

Same here

[@Knowbody42]

There are a few RF lenses that have no equal. I got the RF 28-70 f/2.0, and the 100-500 for that reason. But then, some of the RF lenses are not worth it over the EF lenses. I still use the EF 70-200 f/2.8 II. The RF version is smaller & lighter, but it's not really better in terms of image quality. Still, I wouldn't call the RF lenses I got good value for money. Most people would probably be better off getting an EF Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 G2, and a less expensive 100-400.

[@peterebel7899]

I did not trade in EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM, EF 70-200mm 1:2,8L IS II USM, EF 100mm 1:2,8L Makro II USM (and the 2 big whites). But the RF follow ups do have some strong points as well! I do like the new RF 100 Macro for some new room to be filled with creativity.

[@johnchedsey1306]

@@haydennettleton3272 Oh, I most certainly disagree with that. the 28-70mm, 15-35mm and 100-500mm are superior to any EF lens I've owned. I'm finally at the point where I rarely bring along the EF lenses when I go shooting as my RF collection is flat out better for me.

[@peridot180]

Yeah... there shouldn't be a focus shift problem in a $1400 lens. I rely on the AF since I shoot a lot of moving butterflies and other creatures like fish and reptiles. I am going to stick to my EF version. Thank you for the great review! It really helped my decision. If Canon ever fixes the issue, I will definitely buy it.

[@paulspencer2542]

I have bought this lens, I can tell you its a joy to use

[@sproesser1]

On my R5, the IBIS functions better than at 2:30 in your video, with lenses that lack IS. I'm pretty sure your camera is malfunctioning. They just released a firmware update. Try that before you send it in, just in case that fixes your camera.

[@grsamael]

Focus shifting?! First time i hear that issue on any lens, thank you for mentioning it Christopher, prime work once more.

[@Tainted-Soul]

thanks Christopher the RF70-200 f2.8 came out with a front focus issue which they fixed with a firmware update so they may do the same with the Macro . nice to know its great at F2.8 though . Ill use that from now on and focus stack for the depth of field I want :)

[@ArleyMcBlain]

Imagine that it's a different bottle of Crystal Pepsi every video? He just buys all of it, its not discontinued, it's just Chris drinking it all.

[@phplaw]

Dude, Pepsi paid 1 million Dollars to him for doing that

[@aminesbest]

I specifically looked for your channel for 2 hours, browsing all kinds gear cameras and lens videos. I found your channel now

[@sottheaphoeurng9044]

I really like macro lenses, they're very fun to use, but there are some reasons that pull me back. I like RF lens because of the fast auto focus, accurate, sharp and closer 1.4x aspect ratio. But issues are way more than pro. weight, size, focus breathing, aperture shift and a weirdo control SA ring. I wish canon keep it simple like ef version will be a great lens, not to mention that will keep the price cheaper as well. If that SA ring changes bokeh to smoother like RF 85mm F1.2 DS, I will sacrifice for that, but it's not.

[@EXkurogane]

So, that focus shift problem I've heard so many people complaining about is real...🤔 The soft focus is mostly a gimmick. It unnecessarily made a sharp image much softer.

[@francoisgervais1]

I was waiting for this one from you, thank you I’ll go watch.

[@alfnazr]

Amazing, was desperately waiting for this review, thank you Chris…

[@dexon555]

I would enjoy a review of the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4 IS L.

[@giklab]

If this lens is anything like Nikon's DC lenses, the SA ring controls *which side* gets softer. Shift to one side or the other to blur out the background or foreground, if you're using foreground elements to frame the subject. That's why the "bokeh" got busier in the second example - there was no foreground for us to compare. Of course, in the real world, the feature has questionable utility. I don't think there are many situations where you'd have foreground elements, but no background.

[@ryansalasphotography]

i love this lens so much and i'm glad most of you hate this so the price won't go crazy. thank you haters 👍🏻

[@randydean23]

I know folks have given you grief in the past with claims of fan boy-ism, but the truth is your reviews are the most even handed and fair on this platform. And they have been all along. And it should go without saying, but the scientific method is based around consistency which you have delivered time and again. Thanks for what you do Cheers

[@steveglennan]

Thanks for your review, great as always! I'm happy with my EF L version and works great with my Canon Mount EF-EOS R adapter.

[@Feniche17]

Lovely work. This review is why I watch-I was obsessed with this lens but cooler heads prevailed and I eventually went with the tamron 90mm while I figured I’d eventually “graduate” to the canon. But the focus shift is a bummer. I shoot bugs in flight and get best results with a combo of af and mf around f9 or smaller sooo…this might be a deal breaker, or at least something I’ll be on the look out for to see if this has been repeated, and test for when I rent it. Thanks Mr. Frost

[@ineedagoodusername3164]

How many photographers are sitting there going "hmm yes, I want a softer subject and a harsher background for my portraits"? Kind of disappointed by the SA control setting, though the bokeh is good overall. The 1.4x is very nice, but a bit less impressive of a lens overall than I expected. Hoping for a comparison with the new Nikon macro(s) in future!

[@SyntheticFuture]

Check out Mike's range of macro lenses. A lot cheaper, goes to 1.5, very nice aperture blades. Only downside is that it's manual only and "only" f2.8. On macro though you often need f8 to get everything in focus anyways so I don't see that as an issue.

[@spooneater9001]

Both the 14-35 and the 100 macro have some sort of problem/"feature" that have hindered my desire to buy them. Just when Canon got their camera game together, they can't help but to mess up their lenses in response.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

The in focus part looks appalling when SA is adjusted. I would stay away from those option if I ever use this.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

A bit disappointing. You can pick up 3 excellent dedicated marcro lenses from Laowa for that price. Unsure why they put such a good focus motor in a macro lens. Who uses AF for macro work??

[@todanrg3]

100mm macro lenses are used for many things, not just macro. They are often used for portraits or events too.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

@@todanrg3 I thought people were just using 100mm macro primes in the past because there weren't many other budget friendly portrait lens options available back then. Are people still doing this?? Is it just out of habit or has it become a tradition? $1500 is pretty expensive for the budget conscious portrait lens alternative.

[@IliasKoureas]

@@todanrg3 from what i have seen, most professional use these lenses just for macro shots when they get the time and switch back to their other lenses for the rest of the day. At least that's my experience in baptisms and weddings

[@RealRaynedance]

You're forgetting that it's possible to use a macro lens for stuff that isn't macro.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

@@RealRaynedance but why would someone pay $1,500 for a macro lens that is rarely used for actual macro work? Doesn't make much sense. Most of the 70-200mm F2.8 zooms have very good 1:3 close-focus ability, and I really just don't see any practical use for a 1:1 magnification telephoto lens during an event or wedding.

[@krystiank4213]

Almost every modern lenses has problem with focus shift. Especially wide angle lenses. Nikon solve that problem with closing the aperture during live view up to f5,6 so the sensor is getting actual information about contrast due to lens closing. But theres price for that - slower and generally weaker autofocus system.

[@T.G.F.I]

Christopher. Thanks for doing these reviews, they are simply awesome. The Image Stabilization issue you mentioned @2:31. Have you got it solved from Canon? I do see it in my camera as well, and I couldn't find any others mentioning in any forums. Thanks again.

[@mattdp846]

Should have had a 2X magnification rather than the SA control.

[@johnchedsey1306]

I hope something like that is in the works. I am likely to stick with my EF 100mm 2.8 for the time being since I don't do enough macro shots to justify the expense of the RF yet. 2x would change my thinking, I suspect.

[@lovemycity420]

Great review as always

[@Kailombian1]

A big thank you from Seattle. Fantastic review 👍.

[@mountainhobo]

Re: focus shift -- would the problem still exist if one were to stop down first, then focus?

[@nexeusbd]

good question. any insights?

[@Jones5121]

i like how newer eos r cameras borrow tricks from the old powershot compacts such as the AF wide open or the closing shutter on power off

[@DixonLu]

Defocus Control was patented by Nikon (guess the patent expired). The bokeh on those lenses (105/135) were never equaled, and no software ever replicated. They were also ridiculously expensive when new.

[@mikebroesel]

I ordered and paid for this this lens (Canon RF 100mm Macro Lens) almost a year ago now and understand that I had to wait 6-months to get this lens but I still don't have the "Tripod Mount Ring and Adapter" yet and Canon has refused to comment to B&H for an update. I believe that to be unacceptable customer service and therefore can't recommend "Canon equipment" to anyone.

[@fwiffo]

I'm glad the focus speed is improved. It's pretty normal for slow autofocus on macro lenses, but the EF version is insanely slow. I also like that they improved the long-CA, which is pretty bad in the EF version and very annoying for macro. But I've still seen better. I'm trying to understand the SA gimmick. I guess it's for people who want it to double for portraits, but don't do enough portrait photography to justify a second lens. That seems to be pretty common, but I don't think it's adds much. I would expect that to be a feature on a lower-end portrait lens to let people simulate some of the soft-bokeh they wouldn't otherwise be able to afford. I might wait for an upgrade to the old 200mm macro, or for Sigma's version; iirc their EF version has the best long-CA performance.

[@ljs2274]

Is focus shift still there if sa is on zero ?

[@adrianrcarr]

Does the IS work for macro photography?

[@blortswampson8666]

Plastic hood included?! That's probably why it's so expensive!

[@sergtrav]

It's Canon, baby.

[@joliver4083]

Hi Chris. Greetings from Philippines. Please review Tamron 35-150 F2-2.8 🙏

[@somegeezer]

That abberation control is kinda cool, actually. Gives it a bit of a vintage look to the + side. and more of the 80s cover everything in vaseline look to the - side. I can imagine making a good bit of use of that. Not that I have any need for it, having lenses that already do those things. But still a funky feature.

[@TobiasKochs-r6ii]

Great review ! I wonder would you say the focus shifting is a noticable problem on a R6 II ? Or do you think only on higher resolution cameras like the R5 its noticeable ?

[@kristen457]

Do a review of Sony 70 200 gm Mark ii

[@grahamtomlin319]

for the money canon are asking for that lens it should have no issues, you spotted canon engineers missed

[@nickolasmazzara127]

I wish Canon priced its lenses more competitively. I was looking at an R6, but ultimately decided to save for a Z6II because I felt priced out of Canon’s system. It is a shame; Canon’s lenses seem nice for those who are already in the system, but as someone who isn’t invested in either, I don’t think they justify their price compared to the Z-mount lenses.

[@JordanHandwerker]

You can always adapt older EF lenses as well. I know they haven’t produced many reasonably priced RF lenses besides a few but their New RF lenses are extremely sharp even their cheaper RF 50mm f/1.8 is way better than their older EF 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4

[@networm64]

You better to consider the new Sony A7iv as the E-mount is economically the best at this time with loads of cheap third party lenses. Nikon bodies are cheaper but the AF performance is behind. Lenses are great but limited compared to sony's options.

[@jdam28k]

@@networm64 or better yet, shoot Nikon and Sony, I feel like they complement each other well.

[@networm64]

@@jdam28k Investing in two different systems at the same time? Nope. E mount is almost perfect currently if you dnt need something like a 85mm 1.2 lens or a 800mm f11! Which obviously is not his taste as he prefers Z mount to Rf. Z mount is also can be perfect with selecting a bunch of F mount lenses. But again even if he doesn't need to add the pain of using an adapter for many conventional focal range lenses having a cheaper third party option is a big bonus.

[@borocotochacha]

@ Nickolas Mazzara same here and it was the best decision. Got beautiful output from Z and feels nice in hand. As a pro photographer I know the limits of Z focussing but is not that much further and useless as sayed on YT. I get 100% of my job done even under heavy rain. Didn´t opted for Sony due that I´ve already arm injuries from using heavy equipment. SOny is so small and hard to handle (I shot up to 12 hrs nonstop) that will deepen the problem. ALso know of 8 a7III with broken shutter, so Nikon Z was the best option. Now heading up into Z9 since I already have covered from Z14-24 to Z 70-200 range. Invest on a system forward on. Cheers!

[@baden009]

I just got this lens from Bhphoto. After 4-5 times focus testing, I started with auto focus f2.8 and stopped down to f8, then I zoomed in 300% at center point with 4 images (f2.8, f4, f5.6, f8), I still could not see any notice difference about focus shift problem. Did I get a good copy or Canon just update it?

This lens is suffering from focus shift. When you stop the aperture down the plane of focus shift backwards. It is a significant problem, because Canon’s autofocus system works only with lens aperture wide open (the aperture is closed down to the selected setting only when you taking photo).

[@cagf2013]

Hi Christopher, a little while ago I asked why you left in camera corrections on when testing lenses and you had your reasons. This time they are turned off? Was it because lens corrections weren’t available for this lens? Or have you changed your methodology? Thanks

[@SandyOstroff]

I have this lens and I'm having issues with the lens not focusing when I change from a close up subject to one further away or vise versa. Is anyone else having this issue? I've tried single and servo without any change. Also amount of af points doesn't help either. I did find if I turn the camera off and on again, the lens will focus on the new distance. Any advise would be appreciated.

[@feiyangou8375]

One year later, R6 mark ii has supported focus at shooting aperture, this problem is completely solved, I just wonder its image quality compare to sigma 70 mm 2.8 macro and its image stabilization effect at macro distance

[@henkkok9437]

Any suggestion on how to do this? Perhaps theres a guide on yotube on how to set that up? Thank you

[@henkkok9437]

Edit: oh, I think I found something. You can just set the exposure preview to not ‘simulate it’ and dial the aperture in directly, seems that solves the problem.

[@erkkocak]

@@henkkok9437 which display sim mode you chose to make it fix? Exposure+DOF ? Exposure? or disabled ?

[@henkkok9437]

​@@erkkocakAfter some extremely careful testing with good light and controlled conditions (tripod, 10s shutter delay, good lights etc) the rf 100 correctly places the plane of focus smack on the subject. I tested manual focus versus autofocus using Exposure only and this yielded the best results in my test. Both correctly placed the plane of focus smack on the from of the bottle I used to test this That said 100m f2.8 at close range is quite challenging to really nail the focus

[@erkkocak]

Can you please explain this? How did you enable "focus at shooting aperture" on r6 mii ?

[@ZackCrain]

Excellent review and this lens looks amazing to use. Any chance you could review the sigma 70-200 sports lens for EF mount? I love your videos

[@JimBailey]

Thank you Mr Frost.

[@JavierArellano]

One more time you deliver a great review. I do have a Tamron 90mm that makes great macro shots. I will pass on this one but I will buy the RF telephoto

[@afriquelesud]

Oly's M.Zuiko 90mm macro lens is 👑

[@DyZapongofficial]

Salute to the legend 👍❤️

[@hwirtwirt4500]

The operation of the Spherical Aberration control is a bit of a puzzle, the bokeh affect is interesting but the sharpness reduction on the subject makes it almost unusable.

[@luisfilipelopes2900]

Great review! Seems like a gem of a lens, quite a bit pricey for a Macro 100mm, bur has some genuine unique features, and that AF for a Maxro is something else. That bug on the AF is really strange, hope Canon fixes it for all thise photographers on the system!

[@MannyScoot]

Chris, can these RF lenses be used on a FF Canon 1DX MK III ?

[@JasonWendling]

Do you have an opinion of the Canon RF versus the Nikon Z macros? It looks to me that the Nikon delivers overall better quality.

[@markconte9506]

In regards to the image stabilization, did you set your image stabilization focal length in your camera’s setting to “100mm?” Or was it at the standard 50mm setting?

[@zeb7mar1]

Thanks for the info! What's your first and second best Macro lens in your opinion?

[@hector5851]

SA control: the answer to the question no one asked.

[@RyuSei00555]

Is the L EF macro sharper than this lens? 🤨

[@francoisgervais1]

How do you do the manual focus with the aperture stepped down? You keep pressing the DoF preview button and you focus off of that?

Great question! As far as I know - it's impossible.

[@christopherfrost]

You have to keep pressing the DofF button if your camera has one. Annoying

@@christopherfrost, is it possible to do it simultaneously (change focus simultaneously with the DOF button pressed)?

[@amithrajapaksha7854]

plz Do a review on tamrom 35-150 mm f2-2.8 for sony cameras and also sigma 105 mm f 1.4 for sony

[@bubuli]

focus shift on a macro lens? well, that's a bit unfortunate. the color fringing is also a bit too much for me.

[@networm64]

I expected more from Canon in 2021 especially considering that hefty 1400$ maybe only cause it's 1 to 1.4? LoL Thanks for that side by side SA control shots which showed me it's more of a gimmick and reminded me of some veiling issue I find sometimes cool for video on older analog era lenses. For photography I dn't see any use of it as the normal looked better in all the comparison shots to my eyes. That's a shame that Sony 90mm G lens probably is still the best macro lens in all camera manufacturer brands even though it was introduced back in 2015!

[@anasrida3454]

I think the new nikon 105mm macro is the best one around. For me, my Tamron 90mm G2 is more than enough.

[@joe2snj]

The Sigma 105mm f2.8 Macro Art has even better IQ than the Sony G, be interesting to see a side by side comparison with Sigma and the new Nikon S 105mm f2.8 for Z mount.

[@rayyan5547]

it's canon season

[@pjtrules363]

Focus shift is a deal killer with this lens...I am sticking with EF 100mm macro ...you can't use this lens for sensitive work..

[@kennethlui2268]

Christ, I have a question. Did you take those test shots (chart) at minimum focusing distance or at infinity? It was corner to corner sharp at f2.8.

[@ChalkandIron]

Stupid question, how do you switch between 1x and 1.4x zoom? I was expecting a button on the side of the lens?

[@brianbeattyphotography]

I thought about this one since I don’t have a macro lens, but I’m surprised at how large it is. With how much I hike and backpack it doesn’t seem worth it

[@noradeangelli6674]

Would this lens work on a Nikon D850 (with adaptor)? Thank you

[@StephanBuchin]

The EF version is a very good and sharp lens too with nice colors and great bokeh. The IS is also very effective.

[@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691]

Nice digitalrev music at the end there!

[@hukmai]

Wow funnily enough after seeing the Original Eos R for 1599$ I have been pricing around looking at this lens

[@poldivina27]

I hope canon can launch a firmware update with this lens soon.

[@pinorally]

I had this lens for 1 year and had been waiting for Canon to fix the shifting problem. Got tired to wait and I’ve just sold it. Very disappointed by Canon…☹️

[@uhomachinky]

Thank you

[@dima1353]

I more like Nikon approach - keep it simple and cheaper. I have old "non L" 100 2.8 and it works great on R6. IBIS surprisingly effective in stills and video with this lens. I wish the AF was slightly faster and smoother, but on other hand i have "manual" manual focus. This performances far for convincing me to spend $1750 (real official price in my country).

[@nigelwest3430]

Think I'll stick to my Laowa 100mm f2.8 2X Ultra Macro APO

[@mdturnerinoz]

Christopher! Thanks, fo much for explaining that new ring. I had a tough time finding out what it is used for on my new RF 100mm; love mine btw! At least the R5 is quite easy to manually focus with; best of any Canon camera I have owned. I can even easily used Lensbaby lenses now.

[@mirasga]

SA ring can reduce sharpness for portraits.

[@alitheo1]

i just got my second lens thanks to your amazing reviews, first it was my sigma 18-35 and then this Rf100mm macro so thanks a lot for these amazing videos regarding the IS issue you mentioned , i got the same probelem but i found it works better when i am at a further distance from my subject and when my focus distance and works even better when the foucosing range switch is set to infinity not to the shortest range. regarding the focus shift thing made some test and i did not notice any shift.. not sure if canon did any thing to fix that but it seems like it is a problem that occurs in some lenses and not in others. Cheers and keept it up with the great work

[@Willymaze]

Great review as always! I went back and watched the Nikon Z 105 mm and you said to be the sharpest macro that you've seen. I'm curious to know if this Canon quickly dethroned the Nikon counterpart.

[@todanrg3]

I think Nikon did a better job with their macro. It's smaller, sharper and significantly cheaper.

[@creatorsjourney6286]

As I watched this video I'm thinking, this lens is not that good (all images look soft and not focus) as I read the comments below ( Scapes and Shapes) somehow the settings changed to 360P ! lol changed it to 4K and voila! that's what I was expecting to see.

[@evilted8291]

Is focus shift really such a problem if you are shooting macro? I would assume people would use manual focus for this purpose, so that leaves portraiture. F2.8 gives excellent results, so unless you want to stop down to F4 or narrower, then shoot portraits at F2.8 with AF and anything stopped down using MF. Hardly a deal breaker given the excellent quality results shown in the video.

[@mofi3641]

so, the AF ist fast but not accurate, there is a bad flaring performance and colour fringing in bokeh until f/5.6: how could this be on the edge to "highly recommended"? sadly i think there is something on the "you're a canon fanboy" from others. I don't know why your reviews are more and more biased in my opinion, but please go back to your old style! The worst ones are the Tamron/Nikon reviews. Same lens but different ratings.

[@ricardoramos824]

Bokeh... Bokeh... Bokeh 🙂👍🏻

[@yourtallness]

That focus shift just ruins it. At least I hope they can make it focus stopped down with firmware.

[@rango-konk]

That SA ring is a bit "well nobody asked for it" feature. I have no clue why Canon put that. A feature that can be totally acheived in post processing. As usual, great review Frost. Love from India 🇮🇳.

[@mattdp846]

Yes, a 2X magnification would have been more useful.

[@brodylockwood14]

Ewww that SA ring makes the images look ugly indeed. Why would you ever want this? Looks like you're using a $50 camera.

[@godofhope]

Too expensive....

[@angelisone]

Waiting for decades still a slow F2.8. Where the 100/2.0 or 100/1.8? Canon now copied Sony by remove the focus scale/feet & meters window.

[@ZeLoShady]

PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP USING A COIN FOR THE MACRO SHARPNESS TEST.

[@HoIyGrail]

Please for the love of God stop using capslock, like a child. Nothing wrong with using a coin. How bout you suggest a better item, before critiquing someone else.

[@ZeLoShady]

@@HoIyGrail I have suggested better items on many of his other macro lens reviews so been there done that. Coins are not good because of the specular highlights that reflect off them. It does not paint a good picture for true sharpness. Paper money would be much easier to use and there are no specular highlights and there is more detail to them.

[@NoahStephens]

The jazz music really gets me going. I enjoy Chris’s reviews even with the subtle religious brainwashing he tries to sneak in. Literally “focusing” on God, huh buddy? What evs. Just keep that snazzy jazz intro.

[@christopherfarlow]

I purchased this and received it today. How do I change magnification to 1.4 while shooting?