When this was first announced, I thought it was a triumph of technology over common sense. Didn’t Canon have something better to do than improve one of their best lenses? The original Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro was as sharp as a tack, easy to use, and reasonably priced. I couldn’t see why they’d change it.

After shooting with this lens, I can see why. First of all, some things are just different, but not necessarily better. It’s a thicker, larger lens than the original version, and it has a plastic body (well-made, heavy plastic but it’s still plastic). Some things are less attractive – the price is much higher (but not unreasonable). Some things are a bit better- its textured plastic hood is much nicer than the standard “shiny until something touches it and leaves a mark” hoods on most Canon lenses. This lens is also a bit sharper than its predecessor with slightly better bokeh than the first version.

But 4 stop Image Stabilization- now that, my friends is worthwhile. It allows me to use this tripod-free for a lot of work, even with it stopped down if the light is reasonable. Handholding for 1/10 of a second in portrait mode is reasonable. One thing I would mention though, in case you don’t read the Canon manual: when shooting Macro shots up close the IS is not as effective. About 2 stops is all you can depend on in Macro mode.

Now, if I were doing Macro work with a tripod and focusing rail, would I pay the difference for this lens? No, I’d use the original version; it was a superb lens. For hand-held work, however, there’s no comparison. This one is miles better.
March, 2013