Turbo 0 Posted October 9, 2009 it seems that everyone out there is using a 100mm lens with teleconverters and\or diopters, why not use a Canon EF 180mm instead. does anyone use one of these lens? i am currious as to the depth of field of this lense vs a 100mm with a +5 diopter or 1.7 teleconverter. the only problem i forsee is the camera shake issue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wishbone 0 Posted October 9, 2009 it seems that everyone out there is using a 100mm lens with teleconverters and\or diopters, why not use a Canon EF 180mm instead. does anyone use one of these lens? i am currious as to the depth of field of this lense vs a 100mm with a +5 diopter or 1.7 teleconverter. the only problem i forsee is the camera shake issue. It is huge... f3.5 compared to f2.8 of the 100mm Minimum focusing distance 49cm vs. 31cm of the 100mm So I am lusting for the new 100mm f2.8L... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james 0 Posted October 9, 2009 The 100mm w/ a 1.4x TC becomes an F4 lens which is not too bad. The Sigma 150mm F2.8 is also great - and I have used it w/ a 1.4x TC also. The 180mm is a beast - agreed. Cheers James Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bent C 18 Posted October 9, 2009 I have the 100 mm/2,8 as well as the 180/3,5. I use the 180 above water and the 100 either alone or with a 1,4 tc under water. Without actually trying, I believe that the benefits of the 180 under water is to small to warrant the much larger size of it as well as the economic risk of flooding it. Where I live the costs of the lenses are such that you can flood three 100/2,8 for each 180/3,5! regards Bent C. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H2Oplanet 0 Posted October 10, 2009 Canon 180mm AF is slow relative to 100mm AF...extended working distance of the 180mm is desirable for some subject matter... If I recall optics lessons correctly, the DOF is equivalent/comparable at equivalent magnifcations (anyone confirm/refute)??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
serge 2 Posted October 10, 2009 Another difference between the 180mm and the 100m with a tele is, that the 180mm will also do just 1:1 – just like the 100mm by itself. So you just change the working distance. The 100mm with a Tele will go beyond 1:1 ... so you have more magnification. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nextwo 1 Posted October 12, 2009 I'll been using the 180mm underwater for half a year now and I have to say that i purchased the new EF 100mm IS. But the 180mm have a more defuse background. Its taking a long time to find the focus. U can take grate pictures with this lense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SOX404 0 Posted March 5, 2014 I've been searching for the 180mm topic and finally found it. I shoot macro always with 100mm and now interested to bring my Canon 180mm macro underwater. I'm using Canon 5D Mark II with Aquatica casing. I was wondering, what port extension should I get? Considering I already have: - 18428 AF Macro port - 18453 Extension ring - 18457 Extension ring With the combination of all three stacked together, it is approximately 0.5 - 1 cm too short for Canon 180mm Macro. What's the best solution? If possible, 1 extension ports is better than two. Thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
