If you like photographed portraits, for example, is flirting with the 1.8 / 85 or 2.0 / 100. Those who want to get started in the macro area, is perhaps the 2.5 / 50 envisaged. When the above objectives has risen, but (as I was doing anyway) relatively quickly rise to some disappointment. The macro is painfully slow (no USM), the tube comes out very far, there is no FTM and I have to approach for corr. Figure sizes extremely tight, which often does not work in practice. The image quality is very good. Both portrait lenses serve their purpose well, but if I want to be close to the person (say 50cm), then, I note that the minimum focusing distance of 80cm thwarted this and my image idea is not feasible. I have experienced it and so bought a few considerations 2.8 / 100 macro. It is the perfect combination of the three above-mentioned objectives. 1. The image quality is convincing from maximum aperture on. Right into the corners excellent sharpness with just such a contrast values is present. 2. The panel has 8 slats and provides an attractive background blur. Not as perfect as the 85er, but very close to it. 3. By a switch of focus can be limited so that the autofocus operation is not the whole macro range is activated (max up. 1: 4 reproduction ratio). This will speed up the already extremely fast USM drive again. 4. The longer focal length I for macro shots a little more distance to the object, which is usually better (no shadowing, etc.)
All told, there is a strong buy recommendation for the 100 macro. The build quality is top, the wide focusing ring fits comfortably in your hand and reacts sensitively. The sun visor is of course a must buy, otherwise the contrast is greatly reduced by scattered light. Anyone choosing this lens and operates on a full frame camera, will be happy with over XX years. On a crop camera, the focal length is a little long, so here would be the macro EFS60 the best choice.
