Laowa 100mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro Review (Canon RF) | DA

[@JordanCS13]

I use the EF version to take advantage of the electronic contacts and auto aperture. Not only does it make it easier to use due to the ability to focus wide open and immediately stop down when shooting, but you get Exif, which tells my R5 the focal length automatically for IBIS. It also allows the use of Canon's excellent manual focus aid, which gives focus confirmation in MF. Same optics, of course. If you already have an EF to RF adapter, I'd recommend the EF mount version.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough.

[@EverythingCameFromNothing]

Cheers for this info!!

[@philippe-malet]

Hello. Le fait de choisir le modèle EF pour monter sur une monture RF avec la bague réduit la distance entre le bout de l'objectif et le sujet de la valeur correspondant à l'épaisseur de la bègue je pense. Vrai ou faux ?

[@Those_Weirdos]

Thank you so much for calling out the EF version having the electrical interface. I was just about to buy the RF version, now I need to do more research.

[@acouragefann]

On the RF plattform, I would nonetheless recommend that those that own any sort of EF-RF adapter go for the EF version - aside from EXIF data, electronic aperture control also means that the camera can always use the lens at F2.8 for viewfinder/screen previews and only close the aperture down the moment it takes the picture. While using the manual aperture version, particularly when stopping down to F8 or F11, the viewfinder image quality can genuinely suffer from a lot of noise under darker lighting conditions especially when magnifying the image - essentially requiring one to focus at F2.8, close the aperture manually, then take the shot - at high magnifications handheld, that's an extra wobbly step to take. I experienced all of this using Laowa's 60mm lens, which is also brilliant (and for my purposes has a better working distance) but no electronic contacts either on the EOS R. It should be noted however that early Lawoa 100mm EF versions, when adapted, will sometimes get the camera stuck into APS-C mode with the lens attached, which requires a firmware update from Laowa to correct.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There are pros and cons in both direction. I'm happy with the native mount, myself.

[@PeterGrace2013]

I 100% agree with everything you've said here -- I own both the RF100L and the Laowa 100 and I prefer the Laowa for any situation that does not demand autofocus.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm not surprised.

[@Blaiwnez]

My first lens to the Canon RP, I like the combination and it has done a lot of nice photos for me since I focus on macro. Sometimes slightly heavy and long on the field when chasing small bugs/insects, but the quality is always there.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough.

[@neffknows1]

Have you seen the new 85mm 2x macro from Laowa?

[@Blaiwnez]

@@neffknows1 Yes, but haven't tested it. I know it has higher aperture than 100mm, but for close-up macro photohraphy that might not be a problem if you use a flash unit. If it's shorter in length (the lens that is) that might also help.

[@peterebel7899]

This seams to be a great option for static work (which is quite often the case with macro work, just not so versatile while shooting insects).

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There's some true to that.

[@IanHobday]

Check out Micael Widel on KZbin, he does a lot of insect work with these MF Laowa lenses. It's very possible to do, especially with EVFs and focus peaking.

[@Luke..luke..luke..]

Had this lens for over a year. It's the single best Macro lens I have ever come across. Staggeringly sharp (for Sony FE anyhow)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is very strong optically. A real value

[@johnmitchell2094]

I just added this lens to my lenses. I found that the RF1.4 ext fits it & its great for astro as well.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's interesting about the extender. That could be useful.

[@rickhackley4339]

I have a question on the RF version of this lens. I'm using a Canon R6 and wondering when I attach this lens to my camera do I need to change anything in my settings to use? I understand I'll need to shoot in manual, but heard you say you need to tell the camera the focal length, and wasn't sure how to do that. Plus is there anything else I need to do?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you’ve never done it, you’ll need to enable “Release shutter w/o lens attached”. If your camera has IBIS, you just manually set the focal length in the settings to 100mm. That’s it.

[@cameraprepper7938]

Happy New Year and thank you very much for the text review !

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@donovanj8840]

I always learn so much from watching your reviews. Seriously thinking about purchasing this lens. Thanks very much

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Happy to help!

[@seasterl]

If using this lens on the Canon R5, would I need to make any corrections in post-processing for pincushion distortion or vignetting? Also, does the viewfinder still show the image and suggest the exposure and then I manually enter that aperture on the lens? Lastly, for a first-time dedicated macro buyer, is there a focal length from this maker you’d suggest as a great start?

[@Asyouwere]

Since there is no electronic connection, does the R5 IBIS work correctly?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It does, but you’ll have to manually input the focal length as the camera has no way of detecting it.

[@Asyouwere]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you! I just ordered it, I am really excited for this one!

[@adjake1]

looking forward to what Tamron and Sigma come up with, hopefully sometime this year. I thought the Canon RF100 macro was going to be my next lens purchase, but im not thrilled with the reviews I've read and watched.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's really unfortunate, as that lens should have been great!

[@IanHobday]

A great lens but I've replaced mine with the new Laowa 85/5.6! Just as excellent as the 100/2.8 but a fraction of the size and weight. Highly recommended!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Interesting. I'm surprised I haven't heard from Laowa yet for a review.

[@IanHobday]

@@DustinAbbottTWI It's tiny, even smaller than the Laowa 60mm 2:1 APS-C lens. I ordered mine directly from Venus Optics soon after it came out an have serial #553. Hope you get one to review soon!

[@neffknows1]

​@@DustinAbbottTWI You should ask you contact if you can review on the 85mm, I really think you'll like it. There are compromises (f/5.6), but similar the the no AF compromise, for dedicated macro work on a modern mirrorless camera, it's not really much of a hinderance. The small size makes it feasible to throw in your bag "in case" of a macro opportunity. I'm US Sales Manager for Laowa and your experience with the 100mm is very similar to my own. The strengths of Laowa macro lenses show very well on mirrorless systems, and the weaknesses (manual focus and aperture) are diminished.

[@keystonebrotherb]

@@neffknows1 I have several Laowa’s and realized early on the value and quality of this brand. Build quality and sharpness are much appreciated in the hobbyist macro crowd. Hoods and caps need to be more traditional. My only complaint.

[@JohnDrummondPhoto]

With no electrical contacts, don't you have to set the camera to "open shutter without lens attached" to work this lens? If so, you didn't mention it.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You do.

[@JohnDrummondPhoto]

@@DustinAbbottTWI in that case, how does metering work with this lens? If there's no aperture read by the camera, you'd have to go full manual. Does the histogram still work?

[@peterebel7899]

@@JohnDrummondPhoto The histogram works in any set aperture, even without a lens attached.

[@JohnDrummondPhoto]

@@peterebel7899 thanks! I have my eye on a 14mm NiSi lens that has no contacts either. 👍🏿

[@peterebel7899]

@@JohnDrummondPhoto Easy to be used on an RF body!

[@MeridiusMaximus]

Very helpful, thank you Dustin! Based on your review I just cancelled the Amazon order of Canon RF 100mm macro to order this one. I don't want to deal with that focus shift problem that canon lens has for the price of US $1400. Besides, I have never used a fully manual lens :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hope you enjoy it!

[@bar_288]

I have this lens on my z6.. no regrets except missing in camera focus shifting.... Nice video 👍

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've heard similar from others.

[@rolandrickphotography]

Thanks for that review. How smooth and precise is the focus ring? Is it possible to focus stack manually?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Roland, I would say yes, but that the newer 90mm is better. kzbin.info/www/bejne/gH2kZnWmoJaNebs Better focus ring and slightly better performance.

[@rolandrickphotography]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks, will watch immediately

[@ArcanePath360]

Unless I'm missing something, is the EF version of the Laowa better? Simply because it has auto aperture?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's true if you want the auto aperture, for sure.

[@ArcanePath360]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Seems crazy then to even have an RF version, unless it's sharper and lighter. With the AE you can then use auto ISO if you wish, and also have the EXIF data

[@bali349]

I currently have the laowa 65mm 2x macro for Fuji. If I were to get this lens (with an adapter), I understand i'd have a 150mm equivalent focal length on the crop sensor. However I'm wondering if I would have a better working distance? At 1:1 and even more at 2:1 the working distance is not huge on the 65mm, so it's hard to photograph alive insects. It feels a bit dumb to get a FF lens for an aps-c system, but maybe it could work? Thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You would expand your working distance, though know that the 65mm also has the crop factor applied to it (roughly 100mm), so the difference isn’t as extreme as it seems.

[@nogerboher5266]

Forgot to mention the most important part in any lens: The micro-contrast and saturation performance! This Laowa lens has nice micro-contrast, not on par with some of the Zeiss, Hasselblad, PhaseOne or old Nikon lenses but still really nice micro-contrast! It's really amazing for portraits because you can get that ''3D pop'' because of it!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm pretty certain I did mention that.

[@christianback4256]

I checked your review out of curiosity since I use the Canon EF mount version of this Laowa lens with a Canon 90D. This provides me with 32 megapixels within the APS-C frame. Over the years I found that my preferred lens reviews are yours and those of Christopher Frost. However I don't think that your target protocols, quite similar in fact, are well adapted for macro lenses regarding sharpness and chromatic aberration. I think the technical terms here are respectively modulation transfer function (MTF) and longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA). Your protocol involves a flat front-lighted target, and it is relevant for people taking pictures of flat opaque subjects. Regarding edge sharpness, and because of the shallow depth of field, you're testing both actual sharpness and focal plane curvature at the same time. Regarding chromatic aberration (CA) it is best put in evidence by checking the edges of a back-lighted dark object with sharp edges, for instance bare tree branches on a white sky background. I frequently produce macro photos of insects in the 1:1 macro range using hand-held manual focus bracketing and stacking, very often on a light panel backgroung along with diffused twin flashes for front lighting (examples on iNaturalist, name tag CBack). In this case I don't mind curvature of the focal plane because a) the subject is not flat, and b) the stacking software may pick the sharp elements on different photos for center and edge parts of the subject. In these conditions, which are common for macro photographers, I am concerned mostly by final sharpness, chromatic aberration, and contrast (absence of flare in backlighted photos). In practice, I found the Laowa 100 mm lens providing better results, compared to a Tamron 90 mm macro and a Canon 60 mm macro. It is also more manageable than the Canon MP-E 65 mm macro for field work. Thank you for your excellent reviews.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I actually always use 3 dimensional subjects for testing LoCA, as I do in this review. A 2 dimensional test chart doesn't really show LoCA at all, as you mention.

[@stevechan5569]

Hi Mr. Abbott: Thanks for another great review. I purchased the Lens in 2021 mid May after I watched your EF version review. The local camera store I dealt with have both the EF and RF mounts available with the RF mount cost more. I wrote Laowa and asked for the Canon R6 application details, and they came back and said I should get the EF mount because it has the electronic contacts while the RF mount does not with no other details. The local camera store will not allow me to try out the lenses with my R6 because they were both sealed? I am sure I may have made a stupid mistake to grab the RF mount thinking that it will be physically 2 inches shorter than the EF mount plus the EF to RF adapter. I am still not sure if I missed or gaining anything with the RF mount Laowa lens.

[@acouragefann]

The #1 reason to get the EF version + Adapter over the RF version (aside from EXIF data) is that the aperture can be controlled from the camera. This means that the lens stays wide open (great in low light) while you are composing and only closes to for example F8 (or whatever you have set the aperture to) the moment you take the shot. It is worth noting that earlier EF versions for some reason put the camera into APS-C mode (and this cannot be deactivated - needs a firmware update from Laowa) when adapted to RF platforms which is truly unfortunate. As there is no autofocus involved, even the very cheap adapters from companies like commlite will work fine for the purpose.

[@stevechan5569]

@@acouragefann thanks for the enlightening message. Happy new year.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm happy with the RF version, myself, as I don't enjoy messing with adapters if I don't have to.

[@neffknows1]

The 13 blade aperture is another benefit of the RF version. Both have their benefits.

[@mikesandoval420]

Hi! uhmm, asking if that lens laowa 100mm, is that compatible for canon rebel t6? or do I need adapter?ty

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I believe there is a Canon EF mount version of this lens, so if you buy that, it will be compatible.

[@EzraNovakPhotography]

I love this lens! Such sharp glass! I'm sure it doesn't disappoint on the RF mount.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is really good optically.

[@hzubovi1]

Why are the corners blurry when photographing flat subjects and macro level focusing

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don't think I found that to be the case. I owned that lens for several years.

[@Buzz2646]

Very informative review. Thank you. Seeing how the front element moves within the lens barrel, I understand why the Laowa lens comes with a filter. My question is this: is there any means of attaching a macro flash to the lens?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think the front of the filter is threaded, so yes.

[@robertbirnbach2312]

Dustin, I use the 60mm 2x macro Ef lens adapted on my R5 , I am happy with it but would you this as worth upgrading to?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would say that this really depends on your focal length preference. The 100mm is better optically due to the APO design, but longer focal lengths are better for some but not all things.

[@robertbirnbach2312]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for the quick response> I really appreciate your reviews and your attention to the questions and comments. I think for what I do I will save the money for now and keep an eye out if I see the lens show up used.

[@vipersrt30]

i managed to snatch this for $256 (+tax and shipping it was $290) but wow, impressive lens and i combine it with my r6. even for $450 its a worthwhile lens to own due to the x2 magnification. very fun to use. but the price i got it for was a no brainer haha

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a crazy good price.

[@keystonebrotherb]

I just paid $318 for the Sony mount in mint shape. Love my Laowa’s

[@vipersrt30]

@@keystonebrotherb too good of a lens for the money when you get it on discount or used

[@bigburnerbo]

Which one is sharper? Laowa 100 on fullframe or Laowa 65 on apsc? And Laowa 100 or Laowa 65 both on apsc?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's close, but I think the Laowa 65 is slightly sharper.

[@aaza2310]

Great review, I really enjoyed it can i use it with canon 7D mark 2 camera thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You definitely can, though the crop factor of the 7DII will make the focal length behave more like a 160mm lens, which might be great for your application...or could be a bit long.

[@bigburnerbo]

Sigma 105 DG DN Macro or Laowa 100? Which one is sharper and has better bokeh?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The Laowa is sharper, the Sigma has nicer bokeh. That's often the way of things!

[@nurkov]

quick one, how is focusing on r5/r6 at F8 to F/11 ? with no auto aperture ?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I find that screens and viewfinders are pretty good at compensating to give you more light to visually confirm autofocus.

[@roganthoerson1909]

i am really considering it for my A7IV (the E mount version) but i don't know if using a manual focus will be handy for bees and wasps... ???

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's harder, for sure, if they're still moving.

[@c4_boom41]

Thanks! Was curious about this and the 60mm macro they make.. for Sony, but still informative!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Basically all of my observations on Canon RF should be equally applicable to the Sony FE version.

[@599miata]

Good review Dustin.👍👍

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks 👍

[@largophoto]

Oddly enough I also bought this lens for my Sony...key word apochromatic...for some star photography ...not wide field astro...will try on some stars later in week

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That complete control over chromatic aberrations is very handy

[@largophoto]

Dustin...Thank you for giving this lens a second look it would be interesting to to see if Laowa would entertain some slightly longer focal lengths with a lighter build it would be limited market..undoubtedly

[@MOAB-UT]

The fact that you are comparing a $499 lens to a $1,400 lens says a lot. Laowa has a great gallery feature on their website. You can look at galleries for each lens. I compared the 60mm to the 100mm. I think I will buy the more versatile 100mm. It does much nicer bokeh and you can see a little more background in the shot so it's a bit more interesting. Both are nice lenses though. I was going to go with the 60mm (lighter and cheaper) but the IQ of the 100mm won me over. I did a blind test on split screen and my eye kept going back to the 100mm side. I knew even before I looked- they included portraits and some landscape shots (100mm)- that was a big clue. You don't do that with the 60mm- just really tight (still nice) close ups. Neither is better or worse- just personal preference. Some prefer the 60. My take is these are sadly mostly no frills lenses HOWEVER they certainly do excel in the optics department- if that makes sense. They badly need weather sealing, smoother focusing, electronics for Nikon. IF you are ok manually adjusting and dealing with some quirks, the resulting images for the price will be hard to beat- if they hold up over time. With less electronics it might be more reliable long term but not sure of the build quality of that focus ring- one person reported issues after a few months of light use. At least if you buy new you will get a 1 year warranty- pretty short. Nikon and Sigma are much longer but very limited. I would hate to invest $500 to have it break after the warranty. I $500 lens must last a lifetime if not abused. Planned obsolescence should be a crime- it serves only one selfish purpose- to sell more lenses. Sadly it is very effective. 1-2 year from now, they will release a new version that is weather sealed.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've used some Laowa lenses longer term (years) and not had any break down. I've also not had anecdotal reports from people of lens failure.

[@MOAB-UT]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Good to know. I'm a bit hesitant to believe you or anyone for that matter who is (I believe you are or were) a sponsored influencer. I do want to trust what you say is true. I also suppose you didn't have to respond. I appreciate that you did. My concern is because one lady said hers broke after 3 months of light use. There are also not nearly as many of these lenses on the market as say Nikon so you might not hear anything anecdotal stories. That focus ring seems to be a weak point (imprecise adjusting and very short throw) along with zero weather sealing on the front lens. For $500 they should not miss these details- cost savings measures I suppose. Out of the box, with a little extra manual work, it certainly can capture some amazing images...and it is not $1,400 so I suppose a relative bargain. Given your experience, are there any other macro lenses you would recommend- Nikon D5500/Crop. Tripod and handheld macro- not chasing too many moving things. Getting too old for all of that. I'll grab my coffee and wait for them to come to me! 😆 Thanks.

[@photographer-at-large9795]

It’s disappointing that the focusing ring turns in the opposite direction of Canon/cinema_lens STANDARD

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Unfortunate.

[@Ericbjohnston5150]

Why does canon not have a 100mm 2x macro? Anyone know?

[@peterebel7899]

Canon does have a 1x to 5x micro lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

They do have a much older 1-5x macro lens.

[@Ericbjohnston5150]

@@peterebel7899 yep sure does lots of money, its real pain to use at 5x. Been around a long time.

[@d.k.1394]

Great review

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you.

[@ChaitanyaShukla2503]

Unlike EF version this lacks electronic aperture control so its much better adapt ef version of this lens to RF mount.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm not sure I entirely agree. I don't mind doing manual aperture control, and prefer to not mess with an adapter. I do miss the EXIF reporting, however.

[@ChaitanyaShukla2503]

@@DustinAbbottTWI agree on adapter and I hope Venus Laowa comes out with Auto aperture for RF Macros. I have had aperture ring accidentally move and notice until photos were taken.

[@TritonB7]

The EF version has 9 blades vs the RF version with 13. Not sure if that matters, but thought I'd point that out.

[@piotrdaren2931]

This is very interesting and useful review. Showing pros and cons of Laowa 100mm in comparison to Canon RF 100mm. It would be great to compare them both to Sigma Art simillar focal length lens. :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@RogerZoul]

Sadly, Laowa is not a company that has respect for its customers after the sale. I had purchased this lens in EF format right after it was released. I later bought the r5 only to find that the lens I bought only works correctly in crop mode on the r5. I wrote to Laowa simply to find out what my options were. I got one reply asking for the serial number of my copy and I promptly replied back with that information. I never heard another thing from them after several additional emails. As someone who owns two of their lenses, I will not buy anything else from them. Let the buyer beware.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm actually surprised to hear your experience, as I've not heard anything negative about them previously.

[@vipersrt30]

that sounds very odd, this is a full frame lens and this might be a miscommunication on your camera. you might be able to override that with settings from the r5? i'm not sure of the details but i own the RF version and i've been enjoying it. sadly no electronics

[@RogerZoul]

@@vipersrt30 Curiously, I just noticed that this lens operates differently under firmware 1.5 (on R5) than it did on the original firmware that came on the R5. Back then, if you put the lens on the R5 with the R5 in FULL, then you'd get the full 45 MP resolution of the sesnsor, but you'd get a circular or annular ring around the outer part of the frame. But if you put the R5 in crop mode (1.6), then you'd get the regular 17.3 MP crop-mode image, leaving out a good part of the sensor's pixels. Now, under firmware 1.5, the R5 just automatically goes into crop mode so you only get 17.3 MP images and you never see the annular ring, but you can't get access to the 45 MP full frame of the R5 (not that you'd want to). So, I get 2:1 magnification from the center with 17.3 MP files. Fortunately, I have kept my 90D and my 5DSr to use with this lens and thus I can still get benefit of the 32.5MP and 50 MP on those bodies. Frankly, I would not have even mentioned this had Laowa just responded in good faith to me about this instead of just ignoring me. I would have just assumed this was a pre-R5 lens and thus they never claimed it would work on an R5 (and that is the story with any product released prior to a new body). But they chose the low--road and now here I am in the comment section issuing warnings about how they treat customers.

[@vipersrt30]

@@RogerZoul that sounds weird are you speaking of the 60mm f2.8 or the 100mm f2.8 APO

[@RogerZoul]

@@vipersrt30 The 100 mm 2x but in EF mount, not RF.

[@pobutscrackerbox]

12:05 Was that "45 mega-pickles" ? 😵‍💫

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

ummm, no, but thanks for asking.

[@kronusaerospace8872]

The lack of Electronic Aperture control is a little sad, For insect shooting the depth of field at f/2.8 just isn't enough to capture much of anything (you'd get just a sliver of most insects eye's in focus!). So narrower apertures like f/8 at minimum are typically used, and even f/16 isn't uncommon. Losing sharpness to diffraction means little when the alternative is most of your subject being an OOF blur. Of course a manual aperture lens has advantages when shooting a static scene, thanks to the removal of aperture flicker (electronic apertures don't close down 100% consistently, resulting in inconsistent exposure between shots). However focus stacking software typically can correct for exposure differences. For my macro shooting I'd prefer electronic aperture control, but I can't speak for everyone who would use this type of lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Interesting perspective. Not my own, but I don't do a lot of insect macro, so what you say makes sense.

[@Lon1an]

Welcome to macro photagraphy. Aperture F8 is what I glue my lens on all day long.

[@d.k.1394]

If the canon and the laowa have a relationship and a child lens....that would be perfection!!!!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

LOL - that would be nice.

[@rogeryoung3587]

At the risk of sounding smart, your use of the term 'acuity' isn't correct, when referring to sharpness in your image tests. That term relates to a quality of the visual process itself, rather than what is being perceived. What you should say is 'resolution'. We talk about visual acuity and acuity of the mind, which are a biological features relating to perception, but we don't say lens acuity. You are comparing lens resolution, not how the visual system performs.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I understand the distinction you are drawing, but I like the term as a separate means of describing a particular aspect of resolution.

[@d.k.1394]

I agree canon silly SA control is gimmicky

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Definitely is.

[@joekelly9369]

Ads pissed me off to much another ! Fk

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid that you won't enjoy KZbin, then, as my videos have no more or no less ads than pretty much every other channel.