If you were to buy a macro lens right now for canon

[klotzishere20]

What would it be?
i was thinking the 100 L IS

 

[Overread]

Right now - from canon alone - the 100mm f2.8 IS L without question. However if you expand out to allow 3rd party I would also consider the Sigma 150mm and 180mm and also the fact that sigma appear to be readying a release of something new in that area (I expect a macro lens with OS either a 150mm or 180mm).

Before the 100mm L IS from canon I would have said go with one of the sigma's over the canon options - now however the water is more muddy.

 

[Derrel]

It would be the Sigma 150mm. Longer macro lenses are really handy,and the Sigma 150 has lovely drawing style and bokeh. It's one of Sigma's best lenses.

 

[klotzishere20]

so you would both prolly go with the sigma over the canon?
any other input?

 

[Derrel]

Take a look at this review of the 100mm L macro lens, ad take note of the purple flower illustration, showing the SAME-sized flower, but the vastly different background angle of view and background blurring effects of a 180mm macro, a 100mm macro, and a 60mm macro lens. This simple test scenario is mostly why I prefer a longer macro lens--it renders the backgrounds blurrier, and narrower in angle of view, for a given object magnification in the foreground.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro Lens Review

Lloyd Chambers does a lot of lens reviews and has a highly regarded web site. He suggests that the 100-L might be very difficult to produce. Not sure what kind of stuff you want to use this macro lens for, or what your criteria are: perhaps a lighter-weight macro lens would be better if you plan on carrying it long distances,such as on botanical hikes,day trips,etc...the longer lenses are in the low-30 ounce range, the 100-L is in the 22 oz range.