If you really want macro, the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens is worlds better. at 4' at 200mm, full image, full-frame 5D, 1/250 at f/11. 100% crop from above, no extra sharpening. It's fine for normal photography, but even here at f/11 it's not as good as other lenses like even the $100 Canon 18-55mm EF-s II, if you're on a small format camera. The 1:2 ratio is excellent relative to non-macro lenses, but noticeably less than that of a 1:1 (full life-size) macro lens such as the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro Lens. Just because it is a "macro" lens does not mean that it can be used only for macro photography. Case in point is this landscape sample photo: The original 100mm f/2.8 macro is one of the best portrait lenses Canon ever made. The now discontinued 100mm f/2 was equally as good. Canon is really good at that focal length. I still use the 100/2 and think it gives better results than my 70-200 f/2.8L II @ 100mm despite not being an L lens. You would absolutely have to pixel peep to tell So far, I've only had one session with the RF 100mmL IS USM, maybe 200 shots including same subject shots with the EF 100mmL IS USM using the EOS R5. IQ is comparable but the extra features on the RF version make it more useful to me. IS combined with the R5 is amazing, even at 1.4:1 to 1:1, which is only a close estimate because I shot the Compared to the older Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM lens it replaces, the L lens is undoubtedly a bit sharper at f/2.8, but by f/5.6 you will be hard pressed to find any noticeable differences. The EF 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro has quite astounding image quality in the center of the frame and very good sharpness in the periphery of the image. Lab results Verdict The Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM was Canon’s first to feature a ‘hybrid’ image stabilizer, which has been inherited by a number of other EF-S and RF macro lenses. With enhanced performance for close-up shooting, the stabilizer counteracts x-y shift as well as the more usual angular vibrations. Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Review. This lens is the more modest cousin of Canon’s L-series version, which includes both image stabilisation (IS) and ultra-low dispersion (ULD) glass. None of the EF 50mm f/1.8 lenses extended. Not the original 50mm f/1.8, not the II and not the STM version. If it's the motor that is the source of the comparison, the 1990s version of the EF 50mm f/1.8 didn't use the STM motor like this lens uses. The latest version of the EF 50mm f/1.8 does, but that was not designed in the 1990s. Tried the Canon, Tamron, and the Sigma. Went with the Sigma. Great color, very sharp, extremely nice bokeh. (105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro) Also, the Tamron didn't play all that well with the RP; and you have to have the Tap-in attachment to update the firmware, an added expense to consider. -J. Currently I have an 85mm f/1.8mm lens for widefields. For macro use I consider buying the 100mm f/2.8L lens and as it is close to 85mm f/2.8 (which aperture I use for AP), I would sell the 85 and use the 100 instead for astro wide field use as well. That allows me to bring no extra lens at travel. FOMSXMp.