Can only agree with the positive reviews! At my 5D Mark II This lens is sharper than my Canon 50mmm 1.4; the portraits seem so crisp and the autofocus is accurate to the point (where the 50mm love to go and herrätselt). I had the 100mm L 2.8 IS USM, but as my preferences are mainly Potrait and exemption, I sold it again, because I was too slow autofocus (macro lenses tend to take a closer, but slower autofocus); the imaging performance of 100 L exalted in the representation of the colors and sharpness! I can only write how much me this lens has surprised! The construction is similar to that of the 50s, but the tube is inner focusing, which in case of wrong place any precision mechanics may be damaged as the 50 1.4. Also, the focus ring during the manual focus feel better, he is a little wider and his game is pleasantly sluggish, which facilitates precise focusing! I would the sharpness of the images of the 100L Macro compare (2.8 dimmed) and they seem crisper than my 70-200 L IS USM lens 4.0! I would love to see the comparison with the 85mm 1.8, the extent to which vulnerability to chromatic aberrations (CAs: susceptibility to blue / purple-colored fringing in hard contrast edges) is really better ..
Since I am also an avid reader of Traumflieger side, me on the poor performance of this lens grieved something. I have only to compare the 100mm L lens and am often too critical Pixelpeeper, but here I was just simply amazed at how detailed is the image quality!
As so often is the Photography course an emotional process and often have to read detailed skin pores are matted by image processing. But with this wonderful tool can succeed me from a technical point of ever sharp, focused images to the point!
I highly recommend it! At least every photographer should have a fixed focal length his own name (50 1.8 or 50 1.4, 80 1.8, or 2.0 100 etc)
