| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/28/2006 01:37:33 PM · #1 |
For a while now I have been eyeballing this lens EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro.
Then I see this article for this lens EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM Macro.
Now I am confused. Has anyone used both of these? Since I have a 20D, Is it more important to get the longer focal length of the 100mm, or would I be better off going with an EF-S lens???
Thanks in advance for your help! |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 01:45:59 PM · #2 |
For sharpness, they are equal. Both are very sharp lenses and both work extremely well in non-macro situations.
Now let's discuss a little bit WHY Canon created the 60mm EFS Macro in the first place: in the 35mm ("full frame") days, 100mm was considered the standard length for macro work. But mounting the 100mm lens on a 1.6 crop camera gives the angular coverage of a 160mm lens, and a lot of people didn't like this. So they created the 60mm EFS for the cropped sensor cameras; the effective focal length of the 60mm on the cropped sensor is 96mm...
The 60mm EFS is lighter and smaller, so it's quite a bit easier to hand-hold. I tested both lenses, and went with the 60mm. No regrets.
DOF is not an issue, BTW: at 1:1 focusing distance, DOF is the same with all lenses at a given physical aperture size.
Robt. |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 01:50:39 PM · #3 |
| Just keep in mind the 60mm EFS will not work if you upgrade to a 5D or something similar (full frame) in the future. |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 04:16:25 PM · #4 |
The 60 is a real sweet lens. I toyed with the two and ended up with the 60 and have no regrets. It is tack sharp in focus, handles many different lighting situations extremely well, is versatile, auto focus works well but I prefer the manual on this lens.
it is for the 1.6 sensor size, but an excellent lens. |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 04:42:40 PM · #5 |
I love my 60mm, probably my sharpest lens, and truth be told is probably on my camera most of the time. I've heard it described as "the lens that makes good skin look bad" - its that sharp!
The only slightly negative thing is that you cant use extension tubes with the EF-S mount which is a bit of shame, but works well with a 50mm reversed if you really want to go super macro (although the working distance is then almost none existent!) |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 04:46:58 PM · #6 |
| with 60mm I would expect to be closer to the subject to get 1:1 as compared to the 100mm. So if you are shooting live bugs, 100mm could be better ( you can shoot from a larger distance ) |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 04:52:46 PM · #7 |
| I used to have a 20D and the 60mm Macro was my Favorite Lens. When I upgraded to the Canon 5D one of my regrets was not being able to use my 60mm Lens. I sold it (for about 1/2 of what I paid for it). The 100mm Macro was bigger but it is also a nice sharp lens. I love the 60mm Macro lens on the 20D. |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 05:19:56 PM · #8 |
| How about the 50mm 2.5 compact macro? It works on full-frame too, and it's half a stop faster. Although I don't remember if it goes to 1:1 or not... |
|
|
|
11/28/2006 06:02:06 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by gaurawa:
with 60mm I would expect to be closer to the subject to get 1:1 as compared to the 100mm. So if you are shooting live bugs, 100mm could be better ( you can shoot from a larger distance ) |
I think bear said, in another thread on this topic, that by the time you get down that close (to get 1:1) with either lens, that the distance difference is negligible.
If you want more distance, take a look at the 180mm macro. :-)
|
|
|
|
11/28/2006 07:03:35 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by MadMan2k:
How about the 50mm 2.5 compact macro? It works on full-frame too, and it's half a stop faster. Although I don't remember if it goes to 1:1 or not... |
It doesn't, it's a 1:2 lens. You can get it to go to 1:1 with the lifesize converter (expensive) though.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2006 08:10:42 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by gaurawa:
with 60mm I would expect to be closer to the subject to get 1:1 as compared to the 100mm. So if you are shooting live bugs, 100mm could be better ( you can shoot from a larger distance ) |
IF you are shooting "live" macro, then I agree longer is better, but that means the 180mm macro, actually. As DWTerry mentioned, the working distance is not that different in the 60 vs 100mm comparison. About 2 inches. It sounds like more than it is because they measure focusing distance from the sensor plane to the subject. The 100mm is substantially longer than the 60mm physically, so the actual working distance lens-to-subject isn't that different really.
R. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/07/2026 03:26:40 PM EST.
