Question for the Macro lens length experts.....

[Diego Garcia]

On a 1.6 sensor, would the Tamron Dii 90mm be a better buy/set up than the 60mm EF-S.

Both lovely lens, but not sure which to recommend.

The tamrom would keep you further away from creepy crawlies, but is that harder to focus because of this and does having the 60mm mean you gotta put yer head into a bush if you want the shot? Get what I mean?

Thanks a lot.

D.

 

[Messiah Khan]

What are you mainly going to be shooting? If its insects, then I would say go for the 90mm, or even a 105/150/180mm. Yes the extra length will make it a little harder to use (You will require faster shutter speed to avoid camera shake), but with a bit of practice, its not too hard at all. The extra length will give you more working distance, as well as a shallower dof (which again might make it a little harder to use). However this shallow dof can be quite beneficial if you use the lens for non macro shots (wildlife/portraits).

 

[pxl8]

The extra length will give you more working distance, as well as a shallower dof (which again might make it a little harder to use). However this shallow dof can be quite beneficial if you use the lens for non macro shots (wildlife/portraits).

That's a common misconception. DoF is a function of aperture and magnification. Take any macro lens at set it to 1:1 and the DoF will be the same as any other macro lens at the same f-stop. With the longer focal lengths the narrower field of view means you get less background in the shot which can help to seperate the subject but DoF is unchanged.

Another little known fact is that the focal length of a lens gets shorter as you focus closer, how much depends on the design but the Sigma 105mm is actually about 70mm when focused at 1:1. For any lens the focal length is only (roughly) correct when focused at infinity.

The working distance between say the Sigma 150mm and the Canon 60mm isn't all that different, only a few inches but it can make a big difference with a more nervous subject.

The working distance gets really short if you're using tubes or close-up filters when it can be come a matter of a few cm which can create real problems with lighting.

I think all the main macro lenses are top notch and the real choice between them comes down to what focal length would fit into your kit bag for other uses - if you've already got a 50mm then the 90mm or longer might be more useful, etc.

 

[Messiah Khan]

You learn somthing new everyday. Cheers for that explanation pxl8.

 

[Canon Bob]

Diego,

Having got a reasonable selection of macro lenses....50+LFC, 100, 180 and offloaded the 60 last week, I can offer a little insight into their pro's and con's. (MP-E65 in transit too)

The working distances are 60...86mm, 100...143mm and the 180...245mm.....all quoted for 1:1 mag.

As stated above, the DOF can be eliminated from the "choosing factors" as it's not length dependant.
They're all as sharp as you ever need so that too can be eliminated.
All can be used to good effect as a regular prime and hence can also be eliminated save for your possible length requirements in that department although I think a cheap 50/1.8 would serve you better around that particular length.

My personal experience is that I get most use out of the 180 but nothing to do with the L factor...that only really is a build quality issue and optically it's no different to the others. The increased WD is the main factor in not having things fly off too often. It also gives better possibilities to avoid flash on brighter days. It's 2.5x the cost of the 100...worth it?...no, not 2.5x the price.

As a first and only macro then I think the 100/105 is the ideal length for "teeth cutting" on a 1.6 sensor body...I got it wrong and had the 60 first (rebate bribed) and then the 180 (mis-placed L lust). The 100 came last but really should have been first....I wouldn't have got the 180 if I'd done it this way even though it's my preferred option now...not enough increase in the flexibility for the money spent.

Tubes and macro filters all work but neither produce the quality of a straight macro lens...really just for playing. Tubes on a macro lens are no problem though and I use them frequently on the 180...especially with a 1.4T/C mounted.
The Life Size Converter is a useful little addition if you have a 50mm lens...much cheaper than a dedicated 60 and provides similar working conditions....don't be mis-lead into thinking it's only for the 50/2.5CM, it works on my 1.4 and even other lenses to a lesser degree.

There you have it....low on facts, they're available everywhere....but mainly opinions based on crawling around in the bushes looking for copulating gnats.

Bob