Suggest Macro Lens? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

12/23/2004 01:16:43 PM · #1

I'm wanting to get a really sharp macro lens today... Does anyone have any suggestions/preferences??

I'd like to know how close/far I need to be to take macro photography... I've never shot in macro before.

Thanks.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

12/23/2004 01:20:08 PM · #2

Sigma 105 f2.8 macro, goes to 1:1

Corwyn

12/23/2004 01:20:45 PM · #3

I love my Canon 100mm 2.8
I just got it from B&H Photo

Message edited by Manic - fixed the link (by adding //).

12/23/2004 01:24:16 PM · #4

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Sigma 105 f2.8 macro, goes to 1:1

What exactly are the benefits of 1:1 on a macro lens?

12/23/2004 01:24:54 PM · #5

Do you guys have example pictures shot with your lenses?

Prof_Fate

12/23/2004 01:29:00 PM · #6

I;m curuios too. My experience with macro has been with p&s digicam or my 602. Push a button and get close. In super macro the 602 lens can touch the item and be in focus.

I am looking to get a Rebel and don't want to give up macro pics.

I have hears this 1:1 thing earlier today at teh camera store..what is it and what are the alternative ratios?

12/23/2004 01:35:49 PM · #7

Here are a few shots with the Canon 100mm Macro USM.
The Canon 100mm, Sigma 105mm, and tamron 90mm macros are all very good, sharp lenses. Overall, I prefer the Canon, since I feel it is a bettter all-around lens(a 100mm macro lens is also a great portrait lens and short telephoto). The Canon has a focus limiter to speed up AF, has faster (for a macro lens) AF due to USM (ultrasonic motor), has full-time manual focusing, and great build quality. IMO all that's lacking to call it an "L" lens is a red band. The only down side of this lens is the fact that the lens hood is optional, and costs roughly $40. And it is needed when shooting as a normal lens.
BTW, the 100mm macros are the best general-purpose focal length for macro, IMO, unless you really need additional distance for specirfic purposes. With the 100mm lenses, you're shooting at about 4-5 inches (from the front element) to get close to 1:1. With regard to "1:1" magnification, that means the image on the sensor will be the same size as the object in real life. It's pretty darn high magnification. If you're buying a macro lens, look for this capability, it identifies a true macro lens. Lots of "consumer zooms" pretend they are also macro lenses, but might only give 1:4 magnification. Close-up, yes, but not macro.

Message edited by author 2004-12-23 13:36:36.

rich

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

12/23/2004 01:40:39 PM · #8

1:1 is simply a magnification ratio - it is the size of the image on the film or sensor in proportion to it's actual size.

So for example, a 1:1 macro lens would let you take a picture of a dime and the image of the dime on the negative would be the same size as the actual dime. With the 1.6 multiplier on a Canon DSLR, I am not sure if that changes. I never really looked into that. But basically the larger the number produced by the ratio, the better the magnification of the lens.

I have a 180mm F/3.5L macro lens (1:1 ratio), and I know that would be an overkill suggestion for the retail price tag it carries - I lucked into mine used for a little under $500, which was an absolute steal. The images it produces are fantastic, sharp as a tack, and it allows more working distance than the 100 mm F2.8. On the downside it is heavier and slow to AF when used as a telephoto.

The two macro images I have online here are below:

12/23/2004 01:51:26 PM · #9

Originally posted by kirbic:

Here are a few shots with the Canon 100mm Macro USM.

How do you take pictures of insects that might fly away when you are 4-5 inches from them??? Sounds complicated to me...

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC for Canon

12/23/2004 01:55:16 PM · #10

Originally posted by photomayhem:

Originally posted by kirbic:
Here are a few shots with the Canon 100mm Macro USM.

How do you take pictures of insects that might fly away when you are 4-5 inches from them??? Sounds complicated to me...

Stealth, man... stealth!

kyebosh

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

12/23/2004 02:07:14 PM · #11

i've heard the tamron 90mm is awesome as well as the sigma 105.

Message edited by author 2004-12-23 14:11:25.

Discraft

Canon EOS-20D

12/23/2004 02:08:59 PM · #12

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Sigma 105 f2.8 macro, goes to 1:1

I have this lenses and i'm very happy with it. Theres no zoom on it but it makes an amplification of 105mm. It gets really close to the subjects or objects.

12/23/2004 02:16:56 PM · #13

Does anyone have any comments on the Tamron SP AF 180mm 3.5 Di LD [IF] Macro Lens or have photos taken with it?

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

12/23/2004 02:27:44 PM · #14

Sigma 105 ant :

kyebosh

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

12/23/2004 02:35:20 PM · #15

if you're looking at the farther ranged macro lenses sigma also makes a 150mm macro ex 2.8 for about $600.

Sigma 28-105mm f/2.8-4.0 Aspherical for Canon

12/23/2004 02:35:44 PM · #16

Also, this...

red ribbon shot was taken with the Canon 100mm macro.

Rooster

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

12/23/2004 03:52:00 PM · #17

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Sigma 105 f2.8 macro, goes to 1:1

ditto on this. I have it & absolutely love it. One of my fave lenses.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

12/23/2004 04:29:36 PM · #18

Originally posted by kirbic:

Also, this...

red ribbon shot was taken with the Canon 100mm macro.

Did you have to use any kind of extension tubes for shots like these?

hsteg

Fujifilm X-T20

12/23/2004 04:45:33 PM · #19

Jacko uses the sigma 105. The main differences between the canon and sigma in my reading seem to be the focus motor with the sigma being pretty slow and the canon pretty fast.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

12/23/2004 05:44:58 PM · #20

Originally posted by hsteg:

Jacko uses the sigma 105. The main differences between the canon and sigma in my reading seem to be the focus motor with the sigma being pretty slow and the canon pretty fast.

True, the Sigma lens comes with a case and the hood. The Canon does not. The Sigma also has the focus limit switch, but it does not have HSM (the Sigma equivalent to USM) so, overall, the focusing is slower and it's kinda goofy to switch from AF to MF. Since I use this lens mostly for macro or other stuff like portraits where focus speed is not critical, I bought the Sigma because it was about $200 cheaper than the Canon 100mm.

soup

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/23/2004 05:54:29 PM · #21

i have the sigma 105mm macro - and am very happy with it, for the price difference, i chose over the canon. i don't think the AF over ride is important - as i find manually focusing close up is better than the AF, and faster.

it is very sharp. these are all uncropped.

Message edited by author 2004-12-23 18:00:32.

TLL061

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/23/2004 05:57:24 PM · #22

Sigma 105 2.8

insteps

Ricoh GR III

Fujifilm XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR

12/23/2004 06:59:50 PM · #23

I have the Canon 100mm macro and have no regrets. This was my first lens besided the 18-55mm kit lens. Most of my macro shots have been taken with it. I'm sure the sigma is very good too. I found this link on here not long ago //www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm. Hope this helps.

12/23/2004 07:37:07 PM · #24

I just got the Canon 100mm 2.8 macro... Damn i'm impulsive... I'll have to take some pics and post them here... I almost bought the Canon light ring... I'll probably get it next week... Very nice!