Focus Speeds, old 100 Macro compared to 50/1.8

[kinesisphotogear]

I have the "old style" 100mm/2.8 Macro (non-USB) and the auto focus is rather slow. I'm not sure what motor it has built in, but how would it compare to the

current 50/1.8 lens, which has a "micro motor?" I'm considering purchase of the 50mm but do not have store nearby to demo.

[bobatkins]

Though I traded my 50/1.8 II for a 50/1.8 I some time ago, I don't remember the focus being slow. In general the shorter the focal length the less distance the focusing motor has to move, so I've never had a problem with the 50/1.8 or the 24.2.8, neither of which has a USM motor in it. Macro lenses have to move a lot in order to focus close. This may account for some of the slowness of the 100 macro (which I don't own, so can't really comment on).

[jay_.]

The primary disadvantage of the ring-type motors isn't so much focus speed as it is inability for full-time manual-focus, and the noise. My 90/2.8 Tamron SP Macro has a ring-type motor and it isn't slow at all, unless I forget to set the range limiter so it doesn't go into the macro mode. Doesn't the EF100/2.8 Macro have such a control?

[rsriram]

I've owned the old 100/2.8 (upgraded to the USM version) and still have a 50/1.8-II. No way is the 100/2.8 anywhere close to the 50 in terms of focusing speed. The 50 is way faster... there's a LOT less glass to move, and by a much smaller distance.

 

Having used both the 50/1.4 USM and the 50/1.8-II I'd say they both focus at around the same speed. In fact in many cases the 50/1.8 seemed to focus faster.

[kinesisphotogear]

Jay, yes the 100 Macro has a limiter. The old 100 macro is similar the original breed of Nikon autofocus (no offense intended)�rather jerky.

[jay_.]

Do yourself a favor and trade the 100 on a Tamron 90 SP. Optically it is like the #2 macro in existence, bested only slightly by the Leica 100/2.8APO. The focus-ring clutch is a great feature, since it doesn't have USM...but who uses AF in the macro range anyway?

[kinesisphotogear]

Perhaps I wasn't clear, but my intent of the post is trying to compare 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 auto focus speeds. Aside from the 1/2 stop gained in the 1.4 lens, if the focus speeds are nearly the same, I plan to purchase the 1.8 lens. I was just using the 100 macro for comparision purposes and didn't want another lens with similar slow focus speed.

[rsriram]

One more factor to consider : Many samples of the EF 50/1.4 I've tried (including mine, which I sold) exhibit bad barrel distortion, specially when focusing close. The 50/1.8's I've used were quite distortion-free. You can see a review (with distortion) <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/canon/50-1.4.html">here</A> and some sample images from my lens <A HREF="http://www.rsriram.ws/50-14-samples/index.htm">here</A>.

[eos 10 fan]

I have never used a 50mm f/1.8, but I can say that my 50mm f/1.4 seems to AF fairly quick.

I did a few 'quickNdirty' AF speed tests when I first bought the 50mm f/1.4 lens: I found that if I started from the closest focus distance and AF out to infinity it took some time (relatively speaking) to get past the first 10' or so, but then was very quick at the longer distances. I confirmed this by FTM the lens to it's minimum focus distance, then picking a subject a few paces away - also by focussing on a subject a few paces away, then AF out to infinity. Is this important? Depends on your subject matter.

 

--

[ron c sunshine coast,qld,a]

The 50 is HEAPS faster than the old macro.The various comments in reviews of the 50 on the web allways use phrases like "even though this lens is not usm it easily focuses quick enough" or "focuses quicker than my kit zoom"

[remi_lemarchand]

I have had all three lenses (50 1.8 II, 50 1.4 USM, 100 Macro non USM).

 

The 50 1.8 II focuses fine, but is built like a disposable camera, and the focus ring turns in AF.

 

The 50 1.4 USM focuses about as quickly (not much faster) but is silent and better built (not L quality but good).

 

In summary, the 50 1.8 II is fine as far as focusing speed goes, and optically pretty darn good, it just looks like a disposable lens :-)

 

The 100 Macro with the limiter is ok, a little slower than the 50 1.8 II but not that bad (with the limiter off it becomes horrible though).