Canon 100mm 2.8L

[Kibii]

Hi!
I'm wondering if canon 100mm 2.8L lens is good for sports photography? I was at photo session with known photographer in my country and he gave me his 100mm lens just to test it and give it a try... I shot a running dog and photo is perfect! But when I search on internet everyone says that this lens are not good for sports photography.. Actually I would use it for dog agility and dog sports.. It gave me really good results with a full speed running dog... What do you think?

And by the way, I'm new to photography so I'm still learning to focus

 

[goooner]

Hi, I have the non L version 100/2.8 for Macro photography, and it is my favourite lens. I would think it might be a little short for dog shows etc. Which Canon do you have? I think a Canon/Tamron 70-200/2.8 will probably be a better buy. If the dog shows are outside in good light the F4 versions of the 70-200 might also be an option.

 

[Ido]

I agree with goooner, though I'll add that if you liked using that lens, it doesn't matter what others say. If it's good for your sports photography, then to you it's a good lens for sports. I would assume that, because it is a macro lens, its autofocus isn't as fast as other lenses' such as a 70-200mm f/2.8, that are generally considered better suited for this kind of photography. But if you like the 100mm f/2.8 and it's within your budget, then by all means go for it.

You may also consider the Canon 135mm f/2. I'm not sure how fast the autofocus is on this lens, and what I've heard about it comes mostly from portrait photographers who shoot tight headshots. Otherwise it is undoubtedly a great lens, that's slightly longer and a stop faster than the 100mm f/2.8, so it may be even better for your needs, especially if you shoot in low light.

 

[spiralout462]

The Canon 200 mm 2.8 is the best value of all, and probably more suited for sports. The 100 2.8 is a fantastic lens to own as well. Only you can decide what works for you. Persinally, my 300 f4 never leaves my camera.

 

[Kibii]

Firstly, thanks for replying!
Thing is I don't have money for 70-200, so I'll probably buy 100mm. I use canon 700D (I just started, I got my camera year ago).. It really gave me amazing results! Also, what is difference between "L" lens and non-L lens?

 

[waday]

Cute dog!

The "L" stands for luxury.

 

[table1349]

Cute dog!

The "L" stands for luxury.

No the L stands for "Lasts for Freeking ever."

OP, it's a good lens for sports. I don't use mine much for sports as I have the 70-200 f2.8L II. The 200 f2.8L is very good and the venerable 135 f2 L is probably the best value in L glass Canon has.

 

[goooner]

Firstly, thanks for replying!
Thing is I don't have money for 70-200, so I'll probably buy 100mm. I use canon 700D (I just started, I got my camera year ago).. It really gave me amazing results! Also, what is difference between "L" lens and non-L lens?

No problem. The L lens is normally quite a bit more expensive, and is weather sealed. I think the new version of that lens has an image stabalizer built in as well, costing around double the price of my 100/2.8 that does not have the stabilizer.

I don't know where you are in the world, but the Tamron 70-200/2.8 is about 200€ more expensive than the 100/2.8 and I'm sure it will be even cheaper if manage to get a good 2nd hand copy. I just don't think you will be close enough to the action with the 100 most of the time.

 

[jaomul]

The 100l is a macro, so while it's image quality is not in question it may not focus as fast as other lenses, due it's purpose of use.

Canon do another 100f2 lens, that isn't macro, but likely is a better choice, also it is a faster lens being f2.

I would suggest you look at a 70-200 f4 l zoom lens also. They are excellent and can be bought with or without IS. They are smaller aperture, but focus very fast in ok light with added flexibility of the zoom. You should get one cheaper than the 100L

 

[table1349]

Actually the focus on the 100mm f2.8 macro is fine for the job. Most macro is not focused with the USM but manually.

 

[JacaRanda]

I have the IS version of the lens and have no complaints. However, I have only used it for macros and portraits.
I will give it a go at the dog park the next time I am there (hopefully soon). Pretty sure I remember someone saying that lens or perhaps macro lenses are not suited well for action, but the experts sometimes are just wrong...especially if they've never tried with the specific lens.

 

[beagle100]

I have the IS version of the lens and have no complaints. However, I have only used it for macros and portraits.
I will give it a go at the dog park the next time I am there (hopefully soon). Pretty sure I remember someone saying that lens or perhaps macro lenses are not suited well for action, but the experts sometimes are just wrong...especially if they've never tried with the specific lens.

macro lens can work for action - remember to set the limit switch

 

[Kibii]

I heard that if you play with focus switch (what beagle100 said) you can get faster focus depending on what you are taking photo off... Actually, I have photo workshop next week also so I'll try that lens again with moving objects and see. I was just amazed how I got dog running perfectly but most people say it won't focus fast... And I'm thinking to save more money for 70-200 lens... I'll see

 

[table1349]

The 70-200 is the first sports lens I recommend to most action photographers. It is expensive though so other options are always good to have.

 

[Kibii]

Hm.. I think maybe 70-200 is just too expensive and I'm not a professional...
Also, by "sports" I didn't mean something like football, athletic, swimming or something like that... Mainly just dog sports ( agility, flyball... google it ) maybe few shots of Judo... I also love macro photography, so it's good that is also a macro lens. Dogs are not running extremely fast trough agility course, I can focus on one point and wait for dog to come and then take a photo? Anyway, thanks everyone for replying, it's always good to hear others opinions