Unbelievable ... 22

It was supposed to only sleep on everything a few times, but I think my review will be no different in four weeks. Have the lens shot just a few days, but enough pictures and played through a set of possible shooting situations. It depends on my 5DMKII.

So far I've played around a bit with macro photography and to an old-Adaptall Tamron 90 2.5 and used a Leica Macro-Elmar-R 100 4.0. Both lenses are despite their age really good lenses and can certainly compete with newer, are very well suited for portraits. But both have a drawback: without intermediate rings is not at 1: 1 and wants to use them something universal, it is a fumble. Well, and then, of course, got me the reports of the Canon L 100 2.8 made very curious, and I thought to myself, if already, because already. Because in order to beat the two old glasses really, you really have to pick it up some money.

For processing the lens a lot has already been said, I find them very high. I would not tap plastic as housing material, but rather on coated magnesium, but have no idea whether I'm right there. The switches are well placed and can be optimally operate without removing the camera. The AF is, depending on the switch position, really fast and very accurate, but takes their design in the speed increasing from the more one approaches an object. Finally completely different focus distances have to be set as the remote area in the vicinity of the camera. Finally, you reach the area where you should begin to focus manually, since then the focus by the camera to gamble is. Here then my only criticism: to the Fokusweg by the focus ring to keep reasonably limited, so to not have too much screws, the whole was solved so that sufficient turning room just remains at close range, but at the expense of long range. To focus manually In the far range, can only be tackled with absolute finesse. Since it is, however, use in this area mostly the AF, which is yet to get over.

The image quality of the lens myself formally skin off their feet. The sharpness and contrast are already at 2.8 on so high level, as I have never seen it in any lens in this aperture and in this focal length range. And that goes for both the near - and long range. No idea how to put the rumor that it would decrease in the long range in the imaging performance. What is particularly remarkable that the developers managed to get a very high added sharpness and contrast at maximum aperture without disturbing CA. These are actually things that usually mutually exclusive. Here it is really successful. I think many do not realize what Canon has since put on their feet.

Thus, it is certainly the most universal tip fixed focal length in the area, which is on the market. I'm convinced. I need not mention that the Focus when stopping still increases, to reach approximately 8-11 the optimum, at least on my camera. And you have to look very closely in order to truly realize the increase. The focus does not rise by leaps and bounds, as I know it from other lenses forth, especially very slowly when stopping on. Who wants to have a really sharp lens to the camera times, the Canon should take a closer look. But everything else is right: edge sharpness, color, contrast, Bokeh, everything at its best. Well, with the IS, I could shoot to 1/15 still razor-sharp images without concentration effort freehand, so he performs his duties. Who says that the lens vignetting on full frame over charge, has never had really vignetting lenses in hand. Less will not find in 100. CA's are practically hardly exist, even here I can not understand some comments on it. Anyone who wants to really 0.0 CA, has to put up at open aperture stop with a significantly weaker imaging performance. Dimmed is nothing of CA to detect even with this lens and I look there very closely.
The lens can be called with good reason as an absolute top optics, this is at least in my humble opinion. I could of my cheaper than Warehouse Deals (could not see that someone already had in hand) snag, minus Cashback for me a really good buy.