100mm 2.8 macro construction material (plastic v. metal)

[jpb]

<p>I went to buy a Canon 100mm 2.8 macro lens today (not the new L glass) and I was surprised by a feature that maybe I am just remembering incorrectly… please enlighten me:<br /> <br /> I have used this lens a few times in the past and could have sworn that its body was constructed of metal, not plastic. When I held a brand new copy of the lens today it felt lighter than I remembered (possibly inaccurately).<br /> <br /> Am I mistaken that this lens was at one point not long ago constructed with metal? (Would Canon possibly downgrade this model of lens in order to make more room in the market for the new L version?)</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Always was plastic as are most of the smaller L optics like 17-40, 24-105, 50L, etc. I seem to recall it's polycarbonate, reputed to be stronger than steel.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>The new one, the L, is plastic too.</p>

[jpb]

<p>Thanks to you both for the informative responses.</p>

[tommyinca]

<p>The first generation EF100/2.8 macro with conventional (not IF) focus 6 elements gauss design use a metal bellow. </p>

[zml]

<p>The current non-L 100 macro is a combo of some alloy and "plastic" and the new 100 L macro is a combo of aluminium and "plastic." I understand that the word "plastic" strikes fear in many, but engineering plastics and composite materials are often way more suitable than steel or even titanium alloys for many applications, including lens barrels. (And often way more expensive than steel/alloys to boot.) </p>

[pbizarro]

<p>If you are worried about "plastic", then you should never catch an airplane...</p>