|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/18/2006 01:32:03 PM · #1 |
I read the last thread regarding these lenses, and have decided to take the plunge. However, there are three things I would like to solicite advice on....
1) I am leaning towards the 100mm, but the camera guy in the shop was punting the 50mm. If anyone has both (or even one) would be interested in hearing their thoughts.
2) I do have the MR14-EX macro ring flash, and would just like someone to confirm that this flash will fit on the 100mm.
3) Lastly, it may sound stupid, but is it common practice use a UV filter on macro lenses. If this is the case, I take it that the 100mm (as well as the 50mm) use the standard 58mm filter.
Any advice and thoughts on the matter will be appreciated.
Evan
Message edited by author 2006-03-18 13:32:35. |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 02:06:12 PM · #2 |
the ringlite does fit on the Canon 100mm macro lens, I have the same flash and lens, as for the UV filter, don't use them unless you're shooting macros close to the sea, or in a sandstorm ;)
I have UV filters for all my lenses, but I never put them on, I have quality glass and I just can't find a reason to put a cheap glass to cover the quality, the front element on high price lenses usually have antiglare and scratch resistant coating that is quite a bit stronger than the UV filters, it's different if you buy cheap budget lenses, then UV filter might be able to save the lens from scratches.
the 100mm lens is much better at macro then the 50mm, unless you buy the lifesize converter for the 50mm, then they are close in quality, but the 100mm will always be a better portrait lens ;)
|
|
|
|
03/18/2006 02:44:24 PM · #3 |
| the 100mm has twice the magnification of the 50mm, consider looking at also the sigma 105 and the tamron 90mm macro lenses which all do 1:1 magnification. |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 03:01:20 PM · #4 |
The input is much appreciated. Put my mind at ease.
Thank you
Evan
Message edited by author 2006-03-18 15:01:49. |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 03:01:28 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Kaizer:
Any advice and thoughts on the matter will be appreciated.
Evan |
The Canon 50mm f/2.5 "compact macro" lens isn't a true macro; it only goes to 1:2 reproduction. The 100mm is a true macro, 1:1. You have another option in the Canon arsenal, the 60mm f/2.8 EF-S, which is also I true macro at 1:1... I own this lens and chose it over the 100mm because it is mUCH more compact and lighter; it's a neasier lens to hand hold and to walk around with. It's optically the equal of the 100mm, which means it's very good indeed.
It is, however, an EF-S lens, which means it's been engineerted for APS-C sensors like yours (and mine) and can't be used on a hypothetical, future full-frame Canon body you might buy. I'm not planning on that upgrade path, so that's not an issue for me. If you aren't either, then consider this lens, which is less pricy than the 100mm...
R.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 09/23/2025 02:53:00 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/23/2025 02:53:00 PM EDT.
|
