Canon EF 180mm f/3.5 L Macro USM : Specifications and Opinions

Reviews

What do you think?

Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 259000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

Stefano Scapin

sent on 04 Marzo 2023

Pros: Razor-sharp, 180mm, bright

Cons: Af a bit dated

Opinion: Fabulous macro, quite large and heavy but on the other hand there are few lenses that reach this macro focal length, the af is quite good. 1/1 ratio, I had fun. Unfortunately, after the initial euphoria, he is stuck in his backpack. It is mainly used to make close-ups of animals that would be frightened if you approached with a shorter focal length.

PaoloMcmlx

sent on 24 Aprile 2021

Pros: Sharpness, RR 1X, very high image quality even with extenders, robustness, very accurate construction and also relatively light, the AF is not lightning, absolutely, but for a macro it is more than excellent, very good the resistance to the backlight, excellent resistance to weathering despite the absence of tropicalization, splendid and characteristic finally the blurry "swirly" that reproduces.

Cons: Basically none since the only limits I can find him, the non-circular diaphragm and the absence of the stabilizer, had not yet been introduced in 1996.

Opinion: Excellent goal. The sharpness is very high already at TA and further improves between f 4 and f 5.6 where it reaches the peak of quality; in practice I do not find its sharpness higher than that of the macro 100/2.8 L IS, but given the almost double focal point if from this point of view one of the two has a limit this, of course, can certainly not be the 180! It is undoubtedly less practical in field use than in the 100, partly because of its much larger weight and size, partly because of the lack of the stabilizer, but freehand use, which is the only one I have practised, is sufficiently comfortable and nevertheless ensures excellent results. Finally, the almost TOTAL control of the background is not possible, which thanks to its reduced angle of field, and the remarkable perspective compression, it is able to ensure... from an exquisitely creative point of view, in short, it is many times ahead of a shorter focal point, even if it were the 100 L.

Marco Guerrini

sent on 25 Agosto 2018

Pros: Robustness, sharpness, contrast, compatibility with Canon Extender.

Cons: Price, considering the year of production.

Opinion: Taken new a few years to replace a SIGMA 180 f 3.5, the transition was due to one of my whim to have "original Canon L series" Optics. Build quality and robustness are the first thing you notice in taking it in your hand. The yield in terms of quality is very good, (it was no less even the Sigma actually according to me, as well as the Tamron, you know that the macros are all very good), has a fantastic blurred and a really exceptional color rendition. The yield in my opinion is good already at full aperture but it gains further closing, since the greater use in macro is done at closed diaphragms. Although not tropicalized, it is almost as if it were, no problem in the mornings at dawn in the middle of the dew or under the drizzle. It is not a feather, but the tonnage and the materials of the body impose it. Another positive note (this is also the reason why the change from Sigma) the compatibility with the original Canon duplicators, with 2x III maintains a very good quality allowing a greater magnification or greater distance from the most Can Dodge. It ' an outdated optics and perhaps a new version with IS would not spoil for some use more generic freehand even if its use is done almost exclusively on tripod. Only negative, in my opinion, the price considering that it is in production D over 20 years!

Jacopo Pasqualotto

sent on 06 Giugno 2018

Pros: Build quality, autofocus speed, fluidity manual focus ring, brightness, sharpness, tactile feeling.

Cons: Pesantino if carried around all day.

Opinion: Premise. I come from a Canon T90 with kit FD: With the digital jump I took the machine and lenses that I more return the sensations of analogue. I chose the 5d Classic with the 180 macro both used: they form a perfectly balanced pair; The goal, all IN black metal, is beautiful to see and above all an absolute pleasure to challenge and has a convenient ring for manual focus (IN This the helicoid of the FD was unbeatable). The autofocus is fast, even with very little light, as long as it is limited by the special switch: it is comparable to the speed of the 200 f 2.8. I work 99.9% ad f 3.5 together with the 20 mm f2.8 for my outputs: coupled to the right machine is a lens to have for those who love to enjoy the pleasure of taking pictures.

Juza

sent on 18 Maggio 2016

Pros: image quality, quality construction, working distance and yield of the background, compatible with teleconverters

Cons: high price (there are excellent alternatives at a lower price)

Opinion: The Canon 180 Macro has been for many years my main macro; from the image quality point of view it is really great: between f / 5.6 and f / 11, the diaphragms that are used more often in macro photography, is really crystal clear. From f / 16 then you lose some detail because of diffraction, and the whole opening is a little less sharp and contrasted, but Aperture that interest me is perfect. Like all macros, it has a slow autofocus, but this is not a problem since you'll almost always used in manual focus. The build quality is excellent; It is not weather sealed but that I have never caused problems, even using it in very humid environments. The long focal allows you to have a great working distance and good bokeh; if necessary, you can mount teleconverters for even more magnification and working distance. In my opinion the main flaw of this is the price toohigher than the competition: spending half you can buy the excellent Tamron 180mm f / 3.5 Macro, that I currently use, and really has nothing to envy to Canon in terms of image quality.

Luca Gallizio

sent on 03 Febbraio 2016

Pros: Sharpness, background blur, building and working distance in macro

Cons: Focus very slow, also would be nice had the stabilizer L 100mm Macro

Opinion: is an optical, clear beautiful, very specialized for the macro and unlike a 150mm or 100mm is almost indispensable the use of the stand for the ratio 1: 1 even if the hand-free tests with moving subjects have given excellent results anyway! rnrnPersonalmente I'd like it even more if it had a system a little faster focus would be phenomenal perspective and more versatile, but then we are talking of a macro is known that searching in a wide range of focus areas to be more fouco lens. I feel the lack of a stabilizer such as 100mm L because it also would be used in other contesti.rnrn is a macro product as it is 96 because it is done well and the number one for macro photography. The working distance is outstanding.

Patrick.Morini

sent on 02 Settembre 2014

Pros: Sharpness, contrast, ring maf really well done.

Cons: Weight, no sealing, no stabilizer.

Opinion: Objective great, for me number 1 for macro photography canon available in the house. rnQualità constructive to the top! rnHa exceptional sharpness and contrast by fear. The focus so far is of great help to isolate the subject from the background. In addition to this, the 1: 1 ratio is reached at a distance higher than a shorter focal length. It is used well for portraiture and with the limiter maf the af is fast. The flaws in my opinion are the lack of weather sealing, and especially the almost impossibility to use hand libera.rnPer everything else is a fantastic goal!

Ivan.pirina

sent on 05 Ottobre 2013

Pros: Construction, sharpness, blur.

Cons: Absence of tropicalization.

Opinion: Construction as the other fixed "L-series", and truly at the top, with the classic aesthetically pleasing finish. The absence of tropicalization in my opinion is the only flaw of this view because it is not a lens to use in the studio but in nature. I do not consider defects in the absence of the stabilizer (useless in macro photography), the fact that it is f/3.5 (I challenge anyone to do macro with openness) and the sharpness is peso.rnLa, like the bokeh, unmatched (I had the Tamron 180 macro, but there is no comparison). In my view, the non plus ultra for macro with RR up to 1: 1 even if the quality of the files out of the oven is good even with extension tubes (for these purposes the best canon mp-e 65mm). Rnih conclusion, if used for the macro has no rivals, but of course has a number of "defects" when it wants to use for different purposes (eg. portraiture).

Giallo63

sent on 11 Giugno 2013

Pros: resolving power - rnsfocato mellow and pleasant - rndistanza working in macro -

Cons: footprint - rnpeso - rnprezzo - rnassenza IS

Opinion: It 'a piece of optical great value, even at full aperture shows an excellent micro-contrast in terms of fire; strange thing for a macro, has almost one blurred portrait lens, soft, mushy, three-dimensional, pictorial, pleasant, and under this profile also prefer it to 100/2.8 IS L, which also has one blurred more than acceptable, but not to the level of fratellone.rnL 'absence of a stabilization system makes the use freehand at close range a pure utopia ( as opposed to the 100 stabilized) but the working distance, which offers subjects with elusive allows great satisfaction to those who employs him how it's done, on a tripod, mirror raised and cable flessibile.rnIl weight and bulk non-negligible non him a candidate for long hikes if not with the idea to make precise macro: in short, is not the mediotele to take with itself, for this purpose much better than a telephoto or a 200/2.8, much more compact and leggero.rnCredo that Canon is home to everybody 'Today the best for macro photography in the field and for shooting outdoors "committedta ", ie stand eccetera.rnNon tried it yet in the portrait (!) but I plan to do so, the above fuzzy mercy really nice and natural.