Gear Talk > Lenses

To macro or not to macro

(1/3) > >>

frozengogo:
I've upgraded to a 5dIII, sold my EF-s 60mm macro and now I'm stuck. Do I buy the EF 100mm macro or just use my EF 24-105mm L lens. I used the 60mm for flower photos and portraits. Should I purchase a new macro or just use the EF 24-105mm L? I've used the 24-105 several times for flowers with good results so I'm thinking I should use the money on a different lens. Thoughts?

neuroanatomist:
The 24-105mm delivers a decent native max magnification of 0.23x (a standard macro lens is 1.0x) - quite good for many flowers.  Adding a relatively inexpensive extension tube gets you into the 0.5-0.6x range (at 24mm), at the cost of some light and loss of infinity focus with the tube mounted.

Unless you need to shoot at 1:1 a lot (sounds like you don't), I'd get an extension tube and start looking at another lens. The 85/1.8 makes a great portrait lens on FF.

Mt Spokane Photography:
The 24-105 is fine for normal sized flowers.  A macro lens has low distortion, but that is not likely to be a issue for flowers.  You can add a extension tube or closeup lens in a pinch and get extra magnigication.
Truthly, however, I was very pleased with my 100mmL Macro lens, its much easier to get good images  ... for me.
 
 

Marsu42:

--- Quote from: neuroanatomist on June 24, 2012, 05:39:37 PM ---Unless you need to shoot at 1:1 a lot (sounds like you don't), I'd get an extension tube and start looking at another lens. The 85/1.8 makes a great portrait lens on FF.

--- End quote ---

+1 ... shooting small objects like flowers isn't "macro" in the technical sense, and any decent zoom with tubes or a tc should do just fine. As you know from your 60mm ef-s lens, real macro means that you nearly hit the object with your lens and the usable aperture goes down the drain, making either a tripod or high iso or larger apertures necessary. Good, professional macro shots are a big hassle, so for nice pictures of non-microscopic flowers you won't need a real macro lens.

drjlo:
I love my macro lenses including 100L macro, but the one I would consider is Sigma 70mm f/2.8 Macro which I used to own also. It can be bought $499 new, and it's insanely sharp, AT least as sharp as my 100L.
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/559-sigma70ff28eosff?start=1

Just make sure buy it new from a store with good return policy, as one never knows with Sigma and Canon.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page