- Status
Well there aren't really many options, really just the 100mm and the 180mm f/3.5. I would strongly recommend the 100mm f/2.8L IS, and I'm sure everyone else would agree. Very versatile lens (works great for portraits), beautiful bokeh, and the hybrid IS works incredibly well. It's just a very fun lens overall.
Now if want really, really amazing optics, the Zeiss 100mm Makro f/2 is absolutely stunning. Incredible resolving power and the separation of subject from the background almost has a 3D-like effect. But at the same time it has no IS, no AF, and it costs 2x the Canon 100mm. Now that I write all that out it is kinda hard to justify the Zeiss, but if you're flushed with cash or shoot video primarily it's a good choice.
Now if want really, really amazing optics, the Zeiss 100mm Makro f/2 is absolutely stunning. Incredible resolving power and the separation of subject from the background almost has a 3D-like effect. But at the same time it has no IS, no AF, and it costs 2x the Canon 100mm. Now that I write all that out it is kinda hard to justify the Zeiss, but if you're flushed with cash or shoot video primarily it's a good choice.
Upvote
0
I have a Sigma 105mm DG EX Macro and love it to death. Was able to capture this with my first shoot with the lens
http://i.imgur.com/aBj5D.jpg
Its a great lens, not the fastest auto focus but the lens only cost me $300 and for the quality of it, it is definitely more then worth it, it's like a nifty 50 and now almost always have it on my Canon T1i. It goes to 1:1 ratio and has a nice big 2.8 apature.
here is another pic I took with it.
http://i.imgur.com/2hzor.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/aBj5D.jpg
Its a great lens, not the fastest auto focus but the lens only cost me $300 and for the quality of it, it is definitely more then worth it, it's like a nifty 50 and now almost always have it on my Canon T1i. It goes to 1:1 ratio and has a nice big 2.8 apature.
here is another pic I took with it.
http://i.imgur.com/2hzor.jpg
Upvote
0
say yourself some $, and get the Canon 100mm non-L.
its image quality is effing incredible. if the L image is any better it doesn't even matter at that point, there are plenty of other things much more important to worry about. also, IS is great in many situations, but it's useless in many macro situations. i take tons of macros handheld, and by far the most often cause of blur is the damn wind blowing the subject around, or the subject is moving (bugs). if you are going to be doing serious macros you're probably going to be using a tripod is which case there is no point for IS.
i know it has weather sealing and all that jazz, but if you don't NEED IS or weather sealing then seriously get the 100mm non-L. it is an incredible lens.
its image quality is effing incredible. if the L image is any better it doesn't even matter at that point, there are plenty of other things much more important to worry about. also, IS is great in many situations, but it's useless in many macro situations. i take tons of macros handheld, and by far the most often cause of blur is the damn wind blowing the subject around, or the subject is moving (bugs). if you are going to be doing serious macros you're probably going to be using a tripod is which case there is no point for IS.
i know it has weather sealing and all that jazz, but if you don't NEED IS or weather sealing then seriously get the 100mm non-L. it is an incredible lens.
Upvote
0
My vote goes towards the Sigma 150mm, especially since it can be combined with a 2x converter. It's incredible how much detail a 2:1 macro combination captures:
With the naked eye you can barely really tell that there is a wire connections, much less that it is two differentially colored wires intertwined. I really love that lens. Only bad thing working with the converter is that you loose AF even though it is a 5.6 aperture then. No idea why that is, but Sigma does state so in the manual...
With the naked eye you can barely really tell that there is a wire connections, much less that it is two differentially colored wires intertwined. I really love that lens. Only bad thing working with the converter is that you loose AF even though it is a 5.6 aperture then. No idea why that is, but Sigma does state so in the manual...
Upvote
0
B
benlanghorne
Guest
Another vote here for the Canon 100mm Macro L Lens! I've owned one since christmas, and i must say it's incredible. The fast AF and maximum f/2.8 aperture really comes in useful. The optics are superb, and it's a pleasure to use. No hesitation in recommending whatsoever!
Ben Langhorne
http://www.benlanghornephotography.co.uk
Ben Langhorne
http://www.benlanghornephotography.co.uk
Upvote
0
keithfullermusic said:
Indeed - the pictures of the 100 non-L are practically as good as the L at the apertures you'll use for macro (i.e. not f2.8) and you can pick it up very cheap used. So if you only need it for indoor macro work - IS dosn't help that much at 1:1 and you might use a tripod often - you can get this one, too.
But the missing sealing is really an issue I personally overlooked, and the aperture on my non-L now broke down twice due to dust/sand from shooting outdoors. I have switched to the L, but really the iq isn't that different.
Upvote
0
I have used both canon 100mm macro lenses. For strictly macro work the non L is more than enough, as others have stated the quality of the images is outstanding. The only reason I picked up the L version is because I want to use it as an additional portrait lens to go along with the 85L and the IS helps out a bit for the non macro shots...and I got a great deal on it too.. You can get the non L for less than $400 used, less than half the price of the L...Either way you go you win.
Upvote
0
imkev said:
Since I've got the L now, can you tell me how often you use the 100L or 85L for portraits and why? I wonder if adding 85mm and a wider aperture is really that necessary or if the 100L alone does the job, too.
Upvote
0
P
paul13walnut5
Guest
It's hard to buy a bad macro lens these days, I use the Sigma 70mm f2.8 DG EX.
At the time I bought it (and perhaps even still) it was outresolving anything else in the category, including the canon f2.8 100mm.
It's got slow and noisy AF, but then for macro I tend to set my preferred scale and then focus using a manfrotto 454 micro adjust.
It works on full frame or cropped sensor (the EF-s 60mm does not) and it also makes for a very nice portrait lens on a cropped sensor as well (equiv 110mm) towards that end of the focus range, with the limiter on, it's actually ok AF.
But as I say, the clincher for me was the resolution.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scott1shpau1/1026640641/#
At the time I bought it (and perhaps even still) it was outresolving anything else in the category, including the canon f2.8 100mm.
It's got slow and noisy AF, but then for macro I tend to set my preferred scale and then focus using a manfrotto 454 micro adjust.
It works on full frame or cropped sensor (the EF-s 60mm does not) and it also makes for a very nice portrait lens on a cropped sensor as well (equiv 110mm) towards that end of the focus range, with the limiter on, it's actually ok AF.
But as I say, the clincher for me was the resolution.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scott1shpau1/1026640641/#
Upvote
0
Ive owned the 100 2.8 USM non IS, 180mm 3.5 and MPE-65 and my vote goes for the 180
its awesome.. my fav lens of all time. super sharp
Cant wait for them to release a new version with IS. and hopefully at 2.8
its awesome.. my fav lens of all time. super sharp
Cant wait for them to release a new version with IS. and hopefully at 2.8
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
