Canon 100mm 2.8L Macro - Cheapest ever £469.99

[sp3ctre]

Just caught this offer.. obviously only for those shooting Canon, but it's a cracking lens and an awesome price (Canon cashback brings it to £414.99):

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002NEFLD2

[shawna]

Is there an offer on a wide angle canon?

Really looking for one although i have the 450D so not full sensor.

[tomscott]

Holy moly that is ridiculously cheap!!! Shame ive just bought one £580 (((

Canon rumours have just done a review pretty much sharpest lens available for canon owners
http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/revi ... -is-macro/

I borrowed one from calumet about 2 years ago went to kew gardens with it spent all day there. Wonderful lens









BUY IT!!!!

[tomscott]

Is there an offer on a wide angle canon?

Really looking for one although i have the 450D so not full sensor.

I have a Canon 10-22mm im looking to sell. Minimal use UK lens no dust what so ever in brand new condition.

Give me a PM if your interested

[Stuart Truman]

I've got that 100mm lens and you really don't want to know what I paid for it, or I don't want to think about it

[Stuart Truman]

I have a Canon 10-22mm im looking to sell. Minimal use UK lens no dust what so ever in brand new condition.

Give me a PM if your interested

Is that an EF-S?

[tomscott]

It is EF-s only way to get wide on APC, seriously sharp sharp lens wonderful but my 5D MKIII has just arrived and got a 16-35mm to go with it so need to sell it really

[Stuart Truman]

Useless for me then

[tomscott]

You need a 16-35 or 17-40 then

[Stuart Truman]

I have a 17-40 L

[tomscott]

Then you dont need one lol Unless you want a faster one then the 16-35mm is the one to have

[Stuart Truman]

The 16-35 distorts more wide open, not sure if they fixed it with the latest one. The 17-40 got better reviews so that's where I placed my hard earned

If its fixed, I'd look at a 16-35 to get the better low light performance

[tomscott]

Neither are that great tbh both offer similar results at equivalent f stops. With the 16-35 just slightly better. Both soft wide open and at 16mm you will get distortion and the corners are soft.

But the 16-35 is twice the price but worth it for the 2.8 if your shooting in low light. I do quite a bit of venue/interior shots where a faster lens is really useful without flash. Don't like using flash unless I have to, just annoys everyone around you and isn't very discreet! Lol

[tomscott]

Must have been a price BOO BOO gone back up to £623 now

[sp3ctre]

Must have been a price BOO BOO gone back up to £623 now

Yeah, not sure whether Amazon ever honour those mistakes or not. I have that lens and it is one of my faves, so that would've been an absolute bargain for someone