Good macro lens?

[Simon Wantling]

Hi all, I could do with some advice if possible. I'm generally into my bird photography, but with my 7D I'd like yo expand into macro photography. I'm now in the Market for a lens and have been pondering on the Canon 100mm L series IS macro lens. This is a fairly expensive lens at £730 in the UK. My question is, are there any other Canon fit macro lenses which would also be a good investment. I'm after the best quality image I can get, but I'm not sure if there is anything that would match the Canon, or would I even tell the difference.

Thanks

Simon

[Gavin Slabbert]

Hi all, I could do with some advice if possible. I'm generally into my bird photography, but with my 7D I'd like yo expand into macro photography. I'm now in the Market for a lens and have been pondering on the Canon 100mm L series IS macro lens. This is a fairly expensive lens at £730 in the UK. My question is, are there any other Canon fit macro lenses which would also be a good investment. I'm after the best quality image I can get, but I'm not sure if there is anything that would match the Canon, or would I even tell the difference.

Thanks

Simon

I had the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro and loved that, it was tack sharp and easy to use, it also made a great portrait lens. I sold it to buy the Canon 100mm F/2.8 IS USM lens and though I love that lens I thought that the IS would be more useful, however I shoot a lot of my macro stuff on a tripod, so it did not help. Where the IS did help was using the lens for my Portrait work, it made a ton of difference. As for telling the difference in Sharpness, there is very little in it and you would be happy with either, just dont go bigger than 150mm F/2.8.

I think that you need to evaluate how, where and what your intended uses are prior to making a decision.

Gavin

[brian simpson]

Hi simon, I would try the canon 180.3.5. an amazing macro lens...ive heard good things about the sigma 150-2.8 also...But i would get the canon if you can find it,,

[Marina Scarr]

I found this link very helpful b/c I am also thinking of purchasing a macro lens. I should mention however that I am still undecided. As Gavin mentioned above, I need to evaluate my macro goals before making a final decision.

http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=201731

Good luck.

[Chris Poole]

I second the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro

[James Shadle]

I own Tamron's 180mm F3.5, 90mm F2.8 and 60mm F2.0 Macro lenses.

I use the 180mm on my full frame DSLR and/or when I need more working distance.
The 90mm is a sweet lens that I use on a full frame or crop body.
The 60mm is used on my crop bodies.

All lenses are tack sharp and contrasty. All focus to 1:1
The 180mm can get heavy, but it does have a removable tripod collar.
The 90mm is a great all-round lens with a nice limiter switch.
The 60mm uses a USM type AF motor with manual focus over-ride.

[Simon Wantling]

Thanks for all the advice. Will let you know what I decide.

Thanks again. :bg3:

[ChasMcRae]

I have had the 200mm Nikon Macro and now the 180 mm Canon Macro. I prefer these to 100mm because of the allowable working distance from the subject. Keep that in mind when you consider your needs. If $ is a problem then would consider higher mm rather than buying Canon or Nikon.

[Jack Faller]

The 100mm L is the top of the line, but I found the regular 100mm macro lens which is half the price is also quite good. The lowest cost alternative is the EF-S 60 mm ($470 US). Since you are using a 7D with the 1.6 crop factor this provides a magnification ~ 100 mm with a full frame camera. The 60 mm also focuses at 20 cm, which is closer than most others. If you can get that close the 60mm may work for you depending on what you are trying to do.

A possible downside is that the 60 mm will only work on 1.6x sensors, so if you move up to a 1D, you are up the creek.

If you are doing insects that don't like a close approach, a 180 mm could be a better bet.

Nevertheless, since I got the 60mm, I've used it more than the 100mm.-- It mostly depends on how close you can afford to get, but for the 7D, the 60mm works fine.

[Roy Churchill]

Hi all, I could do with some advice if possible. I'm generally into my bird photography, but with my 7D I'd like yo expand into macro photography. I'm now in the Market for a lens and have been pondering on the Canon 100mm L series IS macro lens. This is a fairly expensive lens at £730 in the UK. My question is, are there any other Canon fit macro lenses which would also be a good investment. I'm after the best quality image I can get, but I'm not sure if there is anything that would match the Canon, or would I even tell the difference.

Thanks

Simon
Simon, after having the Canon 100 non IS macro for several years I recently upgraded to the Canon 100mm L series IS macro lens. I like to shoot macro hand-held and have found the IS version to be brilliant in this respect - in the five weeks or so that I have had the IS version I have got more sharp shots hand held then I did in over three years with the non IS version. Apart from the IS I also think the the 'L' lens has better colour, contrast and sharpness. I do know that at near 1:1 the IS drops to around two stop of stabilization but that makes all the difference for me.
BTW for working distance you need to look a little further than just the focal length, for instance the Sigma 150mm lens gains just 1.6" inches in working distance over the Canon 100mm when shooting at 1:1
If you like hand holding then I would highly recommend the IS lens.

[Chris Brennan]

I second the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro
I am recommending the Sigma 150mm f2.8 Macro as well...

[John Chardine]

The 100mm L is the top of the line, but I found the regular 100mm macro lens which is half the price is also quite good. The lowest cost alternative is the EF-S 60 mm ($470 US). Since you are using a 7D with the 1.6 crop factor this provides a magnification ~ 100 mm with a full frame camera. The 60 mm also focuses at 20 cm, which is closer than most others. If you can get that close the 60mm may work for you depending on what you are trying to do.

A possible downside is that the 60 mm will only work on 1.6x sensors, so if you move up to a 1D, you are up the creek.

If you are doing insects that don't like a close approach, a 180 mm could be a better bet.

Nevertheless, since I got the 60mm, I've used it more than the 100mm.-- It mostly depends on how close you can afford to get, but for the 7D, the 60mm works fine.

Hi Jack- Good advice. Note however, note that the crop factor of the body will not affect the apparent macro magnification factor of the lens. This latter metric is determined by the relative size of objects in real life compared to the size as they are projected onto the sensor. 1:1 simply means that a 1cm diameter coin will cover a 1cm diameter circle on the sensor. This is of course independent of the size of the sensor.

[Simon Wantling]

Hi all,

Just to let you know that after co consideration, I went for the sigma 105mm f2.8 in the end, purely because it ticked all the boxes for me mainly the price. I had a set amount of money and buying this at £400 also allowed me to by a battery grip for my 7D as well.

Anyway, I'm very pleased with it.

Thanks for all the advice.

Simon