macro lenses

feileacan

need to get some advice re macro lenses.

dont have the first clue to what to look for.

been looking at two options

canon 60mm (probably the most sensible)

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Macro_Lenses/EF-S_60mm_f2.8_Macro_USM/index.asp?ComponentID=270631&SourcePageID=26387#1

canon 100mm (the i could push the boat out a bit choice)

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Macro_Lenses/EF_100mm_f28_Macro_USM/index.asp?ComponentID=25850&SourcePageID=26387#1

canon 180mm (the money no object lens)

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Macro_Lenses/EF_180mm_f35L_Macro_USM/index.asp?ComponentID=25854&SourcePageID=26387#1

i want to stick to canon lenses if i can.

any tips to what i should be looking for.

i already have a 24-70mm and 70-200 lenses - can 'tubes' be used for these - might be a cheaper option

on a side note, thinking about selling my canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM as i n longer really use it (its actually to fund the macro lens). any offers ?

elven

From my own experience, I've used the 50mm f1.8 and a set of jessops tubes - about €100 each and it gives you an excellent low light, pin sharp lens as well as macro capability... I just got the canon 100mm f2.8 macro and I frickin love it to bits. Not even for the image quality - which I've been blown away by - but the build quality, lovely and solid, with smooth, silent, quick AF and nice and clear for manual focusing too. 100mm is a nice length for picking out details in a walkabout sort of way too.

The 100mm can be had for about €450 from HK.

feileacan

thanks elven - im really considering the 100mm, the 180mm is double the price and im not sure its worth it. i would be an insect person so dont think the 180mm would be necessary.

think ill have a poke about hk (if she doesn't mind...)

elven

I think albert said that he got more of the 100mm in stock, so you might want to check kea photo on ebay.

Do you think the 100 would be a handy focal length for you other than macro, too? I'm using mine as a walkabout as well, and it's great for picking out details in the city or isolating sections of a landscape.

feileacan

thats what my baby is for (200mm) ; )

Paulw

I have the 100mm macro too and think it's brilliant. Great for every day shots as well as macro. Well worth the money.

Spyral

I use a sigma 70-300 and its macro on 200-300. works a treat.

TJM

I've been using extension tubes on a 50 1.4 and I'm very happy with the results (any excuse to put up a couple of photos):



I've also used a 70-300 in macro mode. It's not true macro though - you won't get one to one magnification:



If you're getting extension tubes, make sure you get auto tubes (that pass through aperture, etc.). It's awkward to set up macro stopped down, and non-auto tubes will make metering difficult / impossible on some cameras.

minikin

don't forget the canon 50mm f2.5, combined with the ef25 extension tube it gives beautiful 1:1

Fajitas!

I'd be going for the 100 if I were you. It doubles up as a great portrait length.

I know you want to stick to Canon, but have a look at the Sigma 105 - the AF might not be as fast as the Canon, but it's very sharp. Very very sharp.

elven

Haha somehow I thought you might chip in with that at some point

I used the sigma first and thought it was fantastic... then I used the canon and wouldn't go back, given the choice. It's in the build quality and nice smooth, silent af that you notice the difference rather than the actual final pictures.

sineadw

Here's one of the 50 1.8 with either the 21 or 31 mm tube (can't remember - sorry!). They're a great cheap alternative (even better when someone gives you a loan of them ) but they aren't great for walking around with. They're a bit fiddly, and of course you can only use them for macro and only MF so there's a lot of chopping and changing if you're out and about. If you have the extra funds I'd definitely say go for the dedicated lens. I've messed about briefly with the canon 100mm and its lovely. Really fast AF, and nice to use at full distance too.

JMcL

The Canon is superb, as elven says, really good build quality, razor sharp images, fast autofocus, and smooth manual focus (and with the USM you can overide the autofocus)

Since you're interested in shooting bugs one big advantage to the Canon is that focusing is internal, ie, the front doesn't extend. One disadvantage might be the focussing distance - 1:1 leaves the front of the lens about 11cm away from the subject (that's minus hood, since the cheapskates at Canon would rather charge an arm and a leg extra for a flimsy bit of plastic)

If you're interested in the longer lengths for a bit of extra distance, and afraid of the hefty price of the Canon 180mm, the Sigma 180mm and indeed the 150mm are supposed to be excellent lenses too

rymus

the sigma 150 is brilliant... and doesnt change length during focusing. It's also built like an Offaly hooker.

feileacan

looks like ill go for the canon 100mm - the 180mm is just a ridiculous price and i cant justify it.

the canon 100mm is about E380 and E60 delivery from HK which is still E200 cheaper than Conns.


thanks for all the advice.

DaireQuinlan

rymus wrote:

It's also built like an Offaly hooker.

Y'know, up until now I had no idea that offaly was a big rugby county !

elven

rymus wrote:

the sigma 150 is brilliant... and doesnt change length during focusing. It's also built like an Offaly hooker.

Now that's a different kind of lens review...

JMcL

DaireQuinlan wrote:

Y'know, up until now I had no idea that offaly was a big rugby county !

Either that or Ryan's been spending way too much time around the Birr red light district