>>4464983
The 100mm macros are only worth it if you're trying to take photos a 0.5x mag lens can't do. My 100-400 can get 0.42x @ 200mm but it's kind of unimpressive for total IQ versus the 100mm I own. Kind of depends on your subject size.
>>4465003
I channeled my inner Ken when I bought my first nice watch and it was surprisingly annoying to get a shot I enjoyed. Even with off-camera flash I felt like I either had far too much diffraction or the light was too harsh.
>pic rel EF 100mm Macro IS USM @ MFD @ f/8 with a tripod