Used Canon EF 100mm f/2 Ultrasonic Telephoto Auto Focus Lens

2019-11-25T19:00:00

This lens is very well built and has even better image quality the the 85mm f1.8 version. Focusing is fast and quiet. Only cons are no stabilization (come on, Canon, and catch up to the times by putting stabilization into the bodies! and is too big and bulky. But it does a great job with image quality so I’ll live with the excess weight for my Canon RP until I can switch to a smaller, lighter lens system with stabilized bodies.

Cheralynn

Originally posted at

2018-04-09T10:05:56

Was blown away by the quality of sharpness this lens produces despite its Age . Honestly , after having returned a few lenses for being too soft , or too slow to focus or misfocus , this one is a keeper ! Autofocus was fast and accurate , light transmission is great for An F2 aperture , very bright in low light situations .Great contrast . Comparably Sharp to the most expensive portrait lenses available . Small Size is great for a telephoto. Less Chromatic Aberration than the 85mm 1.8. I could go on just how great this little gem is ! Oh and did I mention Adorama’s great customer service in dealing with returns ! Can’t stress that enough ! I almost forgot , budget friendly price .....

LETICIA B.

2018-02-22T13:00:51

This is an excellent lease. Exactly what I was hoping for. Adorama shipped it promptly and securely. Great item and very pro-customer experience.

SCOTT B.

2012-07-29T21:00:00

Purchased this lens for astrophotography. Color correction is good and stars are sharp to the corners when stopped a little.

rford322

2012-06-03T21:00:00

I've only used this for weddings so far, but LOVE it! It's great for low light ceremonies, and sharp images. This lens exceeded my expectations.

KC

2012-02-12T19:00:00

I think this lens is one of the must haves... this, and the 50mm consistently provide great images and are used in our still and video sessions regularly.

BOBBY C.

2010-11-01T21:00:00

I bought this lens for basketball photos, but it has worked fabulously for soccer photos too.

PHC

2010-01-24T19:00:00

I don't need a lens that has all the latest bells and whistles, nor do I want to pay for one. This lens at f/5.6-11 takes beautifully sharp images, and that's where I use it most. When I need to use it occasionally wide open or closed down, I can correct any flaws in Photoshop. I use good UV and circ/pol filters, and a monopod/tripod. I'll put this lens against my 70-200f/4L IS anyday for clarity at those f-stops. Price is outstandingly good for a lens of this quality. I am not a so-called "pro" photographer who nitpiks specs and claims to know what's good for everyone else. I'm just an ordinary joe reviewing this lens for NORMAL people. I'm happy with it - 'nuff said! :-)

Joe n.

2009-12-28T19:00:00

I purchased this lens to photograph my wife's dogs at indoor dogshows. I was able to stop the action of the dogs in motion and love the results.

Kennel H.

2009-09-30T21:00:00

I bought this lens as a companion to my 70-200 f/4L IS. The reason I chose this combination was that I wanted the lighter, sharper, and smaller optics of the f/4, rather than f/2.8 70-200, realizing that I would not have the large aperture capabilities that make the f/2.8 so popular for portraiture. Instead, I went one-better and chose the 100/2 to satisfy environmental portraiture needs. It has a larger aperture still, very creamy bokeh, and comfortable focal length for this application (for full frame). It performs comparably to the 100/2.8 macro at f/2.8 and smaller, and it greatly outperforms the infinitely popular 85/1.8 in corner/edge sharpness. I suspect one reason for the creamy bokeh is the somewhat heavy vignetting, which yields more subdued edges to the blur patterns. By comparison, the creaminess of the 85/1.8 bokeh seems to derive mostly from spherical aberrations, explaining the corner/edge sharpness issues.

Sarah

2009-05-27T21:00:00

I really like this lens. I bought it specifically for low light and indoor sports photography with my XSi. I also looked at the 85 f/1.8 and the 135 f2; I chose this for the price (over the 135) and for a little more reach (than the 85.) I know those other lens are great but I am totally pleased with this one. I bought it refurbished and it was like new. It has solid construction. The autofocus works well. I have found it to be very sharp and has nice bokeh. I would make the same choice again.

Fippin

2009-02-06T19:00:00

This is a a little gem of a lens. I purchased it because it was a good compromise between a longer focal length and the compact and lightweight nature of a prime lens. I found the autofocus to be fast and the focal length was exactly what I was hoping for. As I intend to use this for indoor photos of church events, I needed the unobtrusiveness of a prime, plus the low-light capabilities of the 2.0 aperture and the silent nature of the USM drive motor. The only drawback for me was the minimum focusing distance of 3'. I also wanted to use this lens for closeup (macro) food shots but the MFD makes this impossible for what I want to do. Therefore, I ordered the 100mm 2.8 macro but decided to keep this lens as well. I also experienced purple fringing when trying to use this wide open with contrasty elements in the photo, but from what I understand that's a characteristic of these kinds of lenses so I can't really complain. All in all, a great lens if you want longer than an 85mm. Of course, portraits are wonderful with this lens. Good bargain!

KRS

2008-09-28T21:00:00

This has always been one of Canon's best kept secrets. Originally designed, like all of Canon's portrait lens, for film cameras. It gave photographers a little extra reach, with out the price of the EF 135mm f/2 "L" lens. For those who have used it, it's an exceptional portrait lens with a max. aperature of f/2. It creates wonderful brokh, while maintaining very good sharpness of your main subject, even at f/2. The colr and contrast are also extremely nice. I've owned the 100mm, and the 85mm f/1.8, and the 135mm f/2 "L" lens. I like the 100mm slightly better than the 85mm for overall sharpness. But it's not quite as good as the 135mm f/2 "L". Personally, I always found I used it more than the 135mm, only because of sheer size. It's a easily handling lens. Plus it's about $550.00 less than the 135mm. If you can afford the 135mm "L", then you won't be sorry for choosing it. But, if your like many of us, and on a budget. Then the 100mm f/2 will be a pleasing alternative For the price it's hard to beat. Could you improve it? Hmmm.....give it "L" quality build. Maybe make it IS. But since Canon is planning to remove it from their line up, I don't think that will happen. Too bad, it's a great lens from a different time

Rob

2008-06-11T21:00:00

I love this lens!! I am just starting to get into photography and this lens does some amazing night shot!! I was taken by the clarity and ease of use of this lens. I would recommend it for sure.

Al

2007-09-25T21:00:00

This lens performed well. I used it to take pictures of a show of Native Americans dancing at Tillicum Village outside of Seattle. The lens worked flawlessly. I was very impressed with how much light I got. I did not even use my flash

John R.

2007-07-13T21:00:00

I enjoyed using this lens for sports on a 1.6 crop-body; however, I wouldn't mind trying out the f/2.8 100mm for macro capabilities.-[...]

BILLY

2007-02-11T19:00:00

I bought my Rebel XT primarily to take pictures of my daughter ice skating. This lens is fast enough to freeze motion and deliver great pictures. USM focuses the lens very fast and accurately. I am very happy with this lens.

YuanT

2007-02-08T19:00:00

Use for indoor sports shots. Captures nice shots in semi-low light conditions.

JEFF C.

2007-02-04T19:00:00

This lens has great depth of field and the operation of the lens is quiet.

TamDan P.