Canon EF100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
Photography, you get hooked into it and before you know, it's like looking after a partner. You try to acquire the best, the best cameras and lenses but where does it all end. You take extreme good care of your equipments and treat them with utmost respect , at least me anyway, hoping that your investment in the equipments will last a lifetime. Then accidents happened and they hurt like hell. In my more than forty years in photography, I have lost three cameras and two lenses. When it happened, you asked "Why me?".
The latest loss I suffered is my Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro lens. No, I did not drop it and infact I tried to keep it very safe by almost handling it with kid's gloves. Through fear of burglary, I stored my lenses and cameras in a safe particularly when I am on overseas trips. When I returned form my last trip, I unfortunately discovered that two of the lenses had fungus growth as a result of being kept in a dark safe. Yes, I did have desiccant in the safe but that did not help. The other lens is a Canon 70-210mm which is at least over thirty years old and therefore it did not hurt that much although I felt very sentimental towards the lens. It has served me well. More than forty years ago I also lost an Olympus Trip to fungus.
Well what do you do? Buy a dry box or a dehumidifier; another expense. Tell me how many people keep their equipment in dry boxes and use dehumidifier, not me. Maybe that's why I have had fungus attacks on my equipments. In reality, I think it is quite sufficient to just store cameras and lenses in the normal manner but ensuring that the storage is not dark and suffers from dampness. Keeping the equipments in open air should suffice but inspect the equipment regularly and more important use them. Fungus does not like being exposed to UV light.
So, how do people in general store their cameras and lenses?
Due to the loss of my Sigma 150mm macro lens, I have acquired the Canon EF100 f/2.8L Macro IS USM. Here are some images taken with this lens.
The Canon EF100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM is a nice and sharp lens. It is very light compared to the Sigma 150mm f/2.8, weighing only half as heavy as the Sigma. The Sigma lens looks like a tank and is build like a tank, freaking solid. Sadly, weather sealing must have been poor as the internal lens element was attacked by "FUNGUS". Yes, I still have nightmares about the attack. Bokeh is very nice on the Canon EF100mm f/2.8 Macro but then the Sigma has very nice bokeh too. In my opinion, the Sigma is also sharp, perhaps a tad less then the EF100. The sharpness of both lenses is so sharp, it is difficult to tell the difference. I like the lens collar supplied with the Sigma. Lens collar is not provided with the EF100mm Macro. The collar is so useful switching from horizontal to vertical and vice versa. The one thing that I still miss is the nice focal length of 150mm on the Sigma. This gives you a bit more distance from the subject. I find the EF100 Macro focal length a bit too short but I will have to get used to it. I have a feeling I will be scaring away a lot of insects and other subjects or perhaps being too close for comfort when it comes to deadly subjects. I did not acquire the EF180mm f/3.5 Macro USM because it is almost twice the price of the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM and you lose two thirds of a stop and I love my lenses to be at the minimum widest aperture of f/2.8.
