View Full Version : 100mm Canon F/2 How best to test?
I managed to find a flawed 100 f/2 Canon RF for what seemed a reasonable price (315 w/hood & shipping).
here it is:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rt=nc&nma=true&item=220740909712&si=pVSqxRJiGcIRYE6ZoBqCi6%252FmLLw%253D&viewitem=&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWNX%3AIT
the seller will allow a return if I feel the interior scratches affect image quality.
What would be the best way of testing?
I should note right away, at the risk of causing considerable cringing, that I intend to use the lens on the nex aps-c for now---hoping we will see a full frame EVIL at some point under 7k.
I'm in the idaho mountains, here's the sort of exterior conditions we have now :
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5136/5455198086_348b92c0cd_z.jpg
TY very much sirs
Never Satisfied
02-22-2011, 19:44
Reading the add on eBay it sounds like the lens had fungus or similar that got cleaned off, not many other ways to damage an internal element.
Take some shots into bright light to check for flare and ghosting, if you cant see anythng in shots then just enjoy.
I have one of these lenses and they are more difficult to use on an RF than a 75mm summilux due to the almost 340 deg turn in the focus ring.
Enjoy, Andrew.
Your attached picture gives a quite good test scenario. From my experience the 100/2 is excellent at infinity. It's hard to decide which is better, the 100/2 or the (also excellent) 85/1.8.
Well it arrived.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5259/5477497164_443accddc4_z.jpg
It is in extremely good condition except:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5132/5476898147_10933986e6_z.jpg
this in an interior element. It appears to be the only mark on the glass anywhere. Foucs and aprerture are very good.
overcast today, but here we go anyway:
have you seen enough cats yet?
this is wide open
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5298/5477496940_75c40b035e_z.jpg
there should be a fine for posting cat pictures, hehe
100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5091/5477496952_a7d51c4aec.jpg
about 10 feet away about f4
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5251/5476897867_fb5c53d9cf_z.jpg
100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5012/5476897917_db14568086.jpg
and at a bit of distance
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5297/5476897973_be74127c54_z.jpg
100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5218/5477496796_cc86d1885f.jpg
no pp, straight out of this:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5253/5476898255_b110733120_z.jpg
Tried shooting into the bright part of the sky, but not really the day for flare test.
What do you think?
What a jewel, RF teles don't get much better than this. Now go get yourself a real camera to use it on :) Like, a Canon P and some film.
Roland.
back alley
02-25-2011, 12:55
that is one of the better cat pics i have seen...and i hate cats!
i doubt you will notice anything from that scratch...as rollie says use it, enjoy it.
What a jewel, RF teles don't get much better than this. Now go get yourself a real camera to use it on :) Like, a Canon P and some film.
Roland.
hehe, I'm in awe of you guys--seriously. I should just get a nice canon just to have one.
I've had that cat since he was a kitten, now he's 13---yow. Outside cat too, amazing he has survived.
I took my first look at this lens and could not believe it. I saw the scratch and LOLed. I am so lucky. Makes up for all those times I've overpaid, :cool:
Now here it is in real battlefield conditions--very dim, wide open 1/60 ISO 800
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5477276633_61a2aca81a_z.jpg
100
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5291/5477276653_baef631306.jpg
this is handheld. Pretty damn impressive to me.
Cannot thank you guys enough for your help and comments
aoresteen
03-18-2011, 19:04
Is that an Industar 55mm f/2.8 with the green rear lens cap?
Is that an Industar 55mm f/2.8 with the green rear lens cap?
yes:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5177/5462822522_47d39f0856_z.jpg
16USD + 20 shipping & relube by me, hehe. Still some barrel play, I think older is better on the i-61
here the 100 f/2 again
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5255/5533597656_3dd3839c92_z.jpg
bigger:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5255/5533597656_3dd3839c92_b.jpg
oof rendering:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5094/5538827835_2ded31d30f_z.jpg
bigger:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5094/5538827835_2ded31d30f_b.jpg
hard to complain about this wonderful lens
I used to have such a lens.
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/Canon100mm2/965704-R1-15-14A.jpg
mabelsound
03-19-2011, 07:18
I regret selling mine. Will probably re-buy one of these days...
Steve M.
03-19-2011, 07:23
I've found that the best way for me to test a lens is to go out and simply shoot what I normally would, making sure I include some wide open close ups and portraits, some mid range shots at f8 or so, and some infinity shots stopped down. Maybe a landscape w/ good tonal variations.
Nokton48
03-19-2011, 08:29
JSU,
Those are lovely.
I'm not normally a complusive lens tester, but as noted above the seller noted a flaw and I had just a short period to return the lens, if I wanted to.
To give a an idea of the size of the 100:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5091/5540931594_fd78bccf99_z.jpg
bigger
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5091/5540931594_1d202cc0a9_o.jpg
here you can see it alongside the heavier 85 f/1.9, an elmarit-m 90 f/2.8, and several others you probably recognise.
Considering the speed, it's a pretty reasonable size and weight.
the modern Canon 100 f/2 is 460 g and the canon museum lists this at 515 g. Interestingly the modern canon is also considered a fantastic lens.
The famous Zuiko AUTO-T 100mm f/2.0 for Olympus, which fetches top dollar today, weighs 500 grams.
For fun let's add the soligar 135 f/2
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5060/5541009018_bdab0fa0a9_z.jpg
bigger
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5060/5541009018_4097b34d1a_o.jpg
The LTM seems to handle flare well--in the mountain side shot above the sun was just above the frame.
Moriturii
03-19-2011, 12:43
Eff me that's a big lens to put on a rangefinder.
Nokton48
03-19-2011, 12:56
Eff me that's a big lens to put on a rangefinder.
I disagree.
It is also the longest f-2.0 RF lens I know of. There are times when there is no substitute for lens speed.
nice when you are wide open with that paper thin DOF, :)
oops I thought you were talking about the focus throw....
re the big 135:
http://g1.img-dpreview.com/FF3B8136AF474627B2695C40100ADA4A.jpg
bigger:
http://g2.img-dpreview.com/BF92166788254293874E2ED5571484D7.jpg
missed my focus a bit there, but the thing is pretty darn sharp wide open.
Nokton48
05-06-2011, 03:22
I now have a lovely 100mm F2 Canon RF coming from Japan. Should have it in a few days.
Can't wait.
Well, sharp is sharp, but a little heavy for my taste....
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2745/4413947560_f8aa78f1e1_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/squinza/4413947560/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/squinza/4413947560/) by Il conte di Luna (http://www.flickr.com/people/squinza/), on Flickr
Then take the 100/3.5 instead... :-)
Then take the 100/3.5 instead... :-)
I have both :rolleyes:
I always carry the 3.5, it's so small!
Excellent! :-8
The 100/2 is a luxury.
You seldom need the speed, but if you do, the lens is not *too* heavy, when compared with others. I found that the size advantage of the black 85/1.8 doesn't matter (and with most Canon bodies the 100mm is a better choice).
For some reasons a sharp 100/2 lens seem to need certain volume. The Canon has the same size as the Olympus OM 100/2, which performance is comparable. The Komura 100/1.8 is smaller thanks to Ernostar but not as contrasty. My oppinion is that the Canon 100/2 and 85/1.8 are the first "modern" (means: size and weight optimized) Gaussian telephoto lenses in history.
Life is too short to worry about lenses that went away.
Enjoy your Canon 100/2, and show us more results.
I used to have a 100/ 3.5 black and got rid of it because the only use I had for it was filming performers on stage (at night) that were constantly moving and I couldn't keep it in focus. I got rid of it and bought an 85/1.8 black just for portraits. I also have an Jupiter 9 85 Russian too. 85mm is the practical, upper limit for my RF lenses.
Well, sharp is sharp, but a little heavy for my taste....
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2745/4413947560_f8aa78f1e1_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/squinza/4413947560/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/squinza/4413947560/) by Il conte di Luna (http://www.flickr.com/people/squinza/), on Flickr
That's sharp!
You guys tempted me into using it again.
This is f/4
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2345/5732638437_3c6cd5dee8_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/squinza/5732638437/)
Voga (http://www.flickr.com/photos/squinza/5732638437/) by Il conte di Luna (http://www.flickr.com/people/squinza/), on Flickr
It is not so big, after all...
mabelsound
05-18-2011, 01:35
It is not so big, after all...
Agreed, it seems to grow in my imagination whenever I'm not using it.
Nokton48
05-18-2011, 03:16
My new 100mm F2, mounted on my new (second) Sony Nex-3.
Very nice combo. I will be using this one alot.
mabelsound
05-18-2011, 04:49
My only complaint with the 100/2 is the single helicoid which has no effect on IQ.
True, it is rather vexing to have to hunt for the aperture ring.
There are several high quality tele lenses that can be used. The Canon 100/2 is one of them. Is it somehow superior to the Nikon 105/2.5? I doubt it.
There are several high quality tele lenses that can be used. The Canon 100/2 is one of them. Is it somehow superior to the Nikon 105/2.5? I doubt it.
What's to doubt? It's faster, sharp wide open and does not weigh any more (could be lighter) than the nikon RF 105--which of course is not the same lens as the newer SLR 105.
What's to doubt? It's faster, sharp wide open and does not weigh any more (could be lighter) than the nikon RF 105--which of course is not the same lens as the newer SLR 105.
The Nikon 105 is very sharp wide open. The Sonnar design Nikkor is a pleasure to use.
the 105//2.5 works great on the NEX but for me, the fl. is a bit long. 57/1.4 is about the longest I use regularly. I carry the kit 16 all the time, as it's so small and light, but rarely use it. Mainly using the 40 Hexanon AR pancake, CV 21/4, and J3 50/1.5, and 57/1.4 Hexanon AR.
The Nikon 105 is very sharp wide open. The Sonnar design Nikkor is a pleasure to use.
Nokton48
05-19-2011, 10:18
What's to doubt? It's faster, sharp wide open and does not weigh any more (could be lighter) than the nikon RF 105--which of course is not the same lens as the newer SLR 105.
I'd much rather have an F2 lens rather than F2.5 especially since it's quite sharp wide-open.
This is a great lens in my opinion. Other than size and weight (which are not factors for me), what's not to like?
I think there is no doubt the 105 is great, I'd like to have one too :)
but better than a canon 100/2?
no way. the 105 was produced in large numbers, but less so the 100/2, and the 105 inherits it's newer cousin's reputation, so it's a really well known lens.
but the 100/2 and the 85/1.8 canons are canon's masterpieces technically. Both designed by the really famous guy.....
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.