Currently, for macro, I'm using my 7D with a 50mm 1.4, with manual extension tubes. Has anyone tried the 100mm 2.8L by Canon? I'm on the fence about it. Let me know!

few shots:

http://i49.tinypic.com/1he1oo.jpg
http://i48.tinypic.com/24vqh5v.jpg
http://i49.tinypic.com/103vs41.jpg

omg

Thanks for posting the pictures :)

Still looking for opinions on the macro lens though!

pretty decent results with a 50mm and tubes
but if macro is your thing then the 100 f2.8L will amaze you, it certainly is a brilliant piece of glass, far superior to the 50 you using

Well, it's growing on me. I mainly shoot animal portraits, but it's so cool to see what everyone is "afraid" of up close and personal. Idk if I should jump into the L series or just get a cheap 90mm tamron

i find the 100L a pretty decent price, well worth the money
as your sig shows you are walking around with the 3best zoom lenses yet you want to skimp such a little on that?
it has other uses - also a great portrait lens (not quite as good as the 85 or 135 but good none the less)

Well it's taken me a while to save up for my L lens collection. I've also heard that the 100mm is a great portrait lens so I guess thats a selling point. I just started shooting macro a few weeks ago so I'm not sure how far I want to go with it yet.

e: Plus, I'm not sure if I want to upgrade my 16-35 and my 24-70 to the II version.

This post was edited by CanonGuy on Aug 31 2012 10:20pm

I fucking hate spiderssssssssssssss

not worth upgrading them imo

Why do you say that?