Went to Deep Creek Lake (Maryland) 2 weeks ago on a Sunday... Out of all the things we forgot the Beer...Well, My brother-in-law and I drove about a 20 mile in to West Virginia to get some beer which we had to wait to buy untill it was 1:00PM (state law)... well had to kill some time (about 45mins) so I took the following... I just wished I had a macro lens...Now I need to seriously consider 100mm 2.8 macro... unless otherwise you think a different lens would work better...BTW, all shot with 70-200mm 2.8L IS

It´s a nice prime lens. Maybe not long enough for "heavy duty" macro work, but a sharp and still compact enough portrait lens.Mike

Nice pictures.If you are after the insects and little critters, then 100mm is the shortest lens you can use comfortably. The working distance (subject to front element) increases with the focal length but so do the price and weight. Longer working distance is better for skittish subjects as they are easily disturbed. All macro lenses from Canon, Sigma and Tamron have superb IQ, so the choice really depends on the subject, price and weight. -- Gautam

I can't believe you forgot the beer!I too am thinking about (planning really) to get the 100mm macro lens and have read nothing but good things about it.

Funny this would be the first post I read today, and you should write about getting a 100mm macro lens and take a photo of an echinacea plant...Yesterday I received my new Canon 100mm macro lens from B&H, first shot I took was of the same plant, though the one I shot was dead. This reduced-size image doesn't really do it justice, but oh wellThe image hasn't been cropped at all, so you can get a sense of what you can do with it...

Wow nice... Seems like you were at the closest distance to the subject...Triptophwrote:Funny this would be the first post I read today, and you should write about getting a 100mm macro lens and take a photo of an echinacea plant...Yesterday I received my new Canon 100mm macro lens from B&H, first shot I took was of the same plant, though the one I shot was dead. This reduced-size image doesn't really do it justice, but oh well The image hasn't been cropped at all, so you can get a sense of what you can do with it...

B&H has the special on Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro... how does it compare against Canon???anyone? It is little cheaper... about $100...

I have never used the Tokina. I use the Canon 100 mm frequently, and I have tried the Sigma 105 mm and Tamron 90 mm. Of these, the Canon has the greatest working distance at maximum magnification (1:1) of 14.9 cm. The Sigma even though it has a nominally longer focal length has a minimum working distance of 12.2 cm, and the Tamron only 9.7 cm. Looking at the data for the Tokina, it would appear to have a minimum working distance of 11 cm, 3.9 cm (about 1.5 inches) less than the Canon.If working distance isn’t crucial to you, then the Tokina may well be a good buy. All the dedicated macro lenses I have come across have been optically very good to excellent, and looking at reviews, the Tokina seems to be no exception. Of course the build quality varies with the price, as do the erganomics and AF speed; all the lenses that I have mentioned above, except the Canon, have extending barrels.Here are some links to reviews: http://www.shutterbug.com/equipmentreviews/lenses/0106tokina/index.html http://www.radugrozescu.com/photo-tech/tokina-100-macro-review.html http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tokina_100_28/index.htmBrian A.