Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Good macro lens?

  1. #1
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northamptonshire, UK
    Posts
    451
    Threads
    152
    Thank You Posts

    Default Good macro lens?

    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

  2. #2
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Augustine FL
    Posts
    99
    Threads
    18
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon Wantling View Post
    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
    Last edited by Gavin Slabbert; 08-04-2011 at 02:29 PM.

  3. #3
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Rigaud Mountain,Quebec
    Posts
    94
    Threads
    13
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    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,,

  4. #4
    Lifetime Member Marina Scarr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Posts
    10,347
    Threads
    403
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    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/v...?f=57&t=201731

    Good luck.
    Last edited by Marina Scarr; 08-04-2011 at 03:43 PM.
    Marina Scarr
    Florida Master Naturalist
    Website, Facebook

  5. #5
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Palm Coast, Fla - The Hammock
    Posts
    68
    Threads
    3
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I second the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro

  6. #6
    Co-Founder James Shadle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Valrico, Fl
    Posts
    5,108
    Threads
    1,419
    Thank You Posts
    Blog Entries
    11

    Default

    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.

  7. #7
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northamptonshire, UK
    Posts
    451
    Threads
    152
    Thank You Posts

    Default

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

    Thanks again.

  8. #8
    ChasMcRae
    Guest

    Default

    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.

  9. #9
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Clinton, Connecticut, United States, 06413
    Posts
    81
    Threads
    21
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    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.

  10. #10
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Barnstaple,South West England
    Posts
    155
    Threads
    28
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon Wantling View Post
    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.

  11. #11
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    294
    Threads
    61
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Poole View Post
    I second the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro
    I am recommending the Sigma 150mm f2.8 Macro as well...

  12. #12
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,588
    Threads
    643
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Faller View Post
    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.

  13. #13
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northamptonshire, UK
    Posts
    451
    Threads
    152
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics