What macro

Trev4

Trev4

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,967
Name
Trev
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Guys
I have been researching macro lenses to use with my 50D. Mainly I want it for macro nature work but it will probably be used for other purposes.
The choices I have narrowed it down to are:

Tamron 90mm F2.8 Di
Canon EFS 60mm F2.8 USM
Canon EF 100mm f2.8 USM

There seems to be for's and against's for each one. Can I ask if anyone has experienced these lenses and what are your opinions.
Thanks
Trev
 
If it was me I would go for the longer length, and generally there is very little difference between the IQ of any of the diffeent manufacturers, maybe look at the siggy 105 aswell
Edit: I have the Canon 100mm macro and it's a nice well built lens.
 
The Canon 60mm F2.8 is a very good lens I think
As I have tried it out in Jessops before but didnt have the cash to get it at that time!
Shame
 
I used to own the Tamron when i ran a Nikon system and as my first macro lens i found it to be fantastic. I've never tried the Sigma nor the Tokina but the Canon 100mm is in a class of its own, much better than the 90mm and well worth saving for.
 
The canon 100mm macro is a fantastic lens. I have owned mine for several years. Over a lengthy period of time (several years in fact), I have bought and sold several lenses. The 100 macro has survived all of my camera bag spring cleanings... is my trusty "I know I'll get it right" lens. I'll never part with it.
Just buy it, you won't regret it.
 
:plusone:

Have the lens and it's excellent.
 
To be honest most dedicated macro lens are good enough but the most critical work. The point about working distance is a valid one. Lastly, the Tamron 90, while very sharp, is very noisy!
 
I think the 60 will be too close a working range for wildlife. I would go for the Canon 100mm if you can afford it or the SIgma 105 gets good reviews.
 
dragonfly said:
I meant the motor! Not the image quality:lol::lol:
Click to expand...
Haha I realised that, but its the first time I have heard anyone talk of that, although I never used my macro in AF like a lot of people because you will find most of them are painfully slow in AF mode.
 
Thanks to everyone who has added their opinion. It seems a pretty unanimous vote for the Canon 100mm.
I have read reviews about all these lenses, but I value the opinions of people like you who have hands on experience more than a magazine that might have other reasons for promoting a product.
Looks like another order for Kerso.
Thanks again.
Trev
 
How much are they from Kerso? A couple have been sold on here recently for around £300 secondhand. I think that might be the only way i can afford one!
 
trapper501, While you will pay a little more from Kerso than for secondhand, you have the security of owning a new lens with a full warranty.
I have been watching a lens from a seller on Ebay, and with half a day to go before the end of the auction, it is already only £50.00 below a new one. The sale price will no doubt increase in the next few hours making it less interesting to buy secondhand. With such a relatively small price differential, I feel a brand new lens is a better buy, especially as the true history of the lens in unknown (been dropped, water damage etc.).
A lens from a TP member around the £300.00 that you mentioned would be worth considering, I feel that most members here are honourable (please dont start a new thread about honour here lol), or should I say genuine, or reliable, I would feel more confident buying from a TP member than from eBay.
To get an accurate price, drop Kerso a line and make an enquiry.
Trev

EDIT: The lens mentioned above finaly sold for £35.00 below the cost of a new one. This lens was 2 years old which shows they hold their value, but as mentioned, I regard it worth £35.00 to have a new one with a full warranty.
Trev
 
My very first shot with an EF-S 60mm Macro
tIMG_1504.jpg

Full JPEG Full RAW

1:1 with R2
tIMG_1507.jpg

Full JPEG Full RAW

As you can see I need lots of practice, but the sharpness of this lens is stunning. The 60mm length also appears ideal for portraits on my 1.6crop 40D.
 
I've owned the Canon 100mm until recently and had a chance to try out the Tamron 90mm as well.

Both are equally sharp. Really, they are. I did a side-by-side test and the incredibly boring results are here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dk_spook/sets/72157606556168117/

But here is why I chose the 100mm Canon:

1) The AF. It's awesome. No problems keeping up with fast moving bugs at 1:1.
2) Internal focus. The Tamron 90mm almost doubles it's lenght when focusing, and it gets longer as you focus closer. As a result I was constantly bumping it into what I was trying to shoot. The minimum working distance (1:1 point) is almost inside the lens hood.
3) The build. The Tammy feels solid but crude. Think "Made in Russia". The Canon feels solid and smooth, just right :)
4) Full time manual focus on the Canon. On the Tamron you have to push or pull the focus ring to go from auto to manual or vice versa. Which ensures that you will lose your focus. And likely scare away the critter.

My shots from the Tammy are here

My shots from the Canon are here

Have you considered the Sigma 150mm? Cracking lens, the longer working distance makes it great for butterflies.

Just my thoughts on the subject, your mileage may vary.
 
Thanks to everyone who helped here. I have now bought the Canon 100mm f2.8, it seems the lens of choice. So far I have to say I am delighted with it and can see why you all like it so.
I have added a few pictures taken today, they are posted in the macro forum.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=149976

Any comments are welcome, I need to get it together to improve now.
Thanks again for all your help guys.
Trev
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top