DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Looking for the most versatel macro lens.
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 29, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/16/2004 09:21:12 AM · #1
Want something with atleast a 1:1 ratio so that I can get extremly close to subjects and be able to focus down to them, but yet still want the lens to go all the way to infinity so I can shoot other subjects without having to take the lens off. My birthday is this Sunday and I haven't told the rents what I want for my birthday, thought they could just get this lens off my list and that would be great, thanks guys for your help.
Clint
 04/16/2004 09:28:01 AM · #2
the sigma 105mm macro lens or the sigma 50mm macro lens

James
 04/16/2004 09:30:43 AM · #3
I recommend the Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM macro lens. Reasons are:

- Sharp as heck; don't cut yourself!
- Goes 1:1 but retains infinity focus
- Dual range AF and USM, full-time manual focus; a great, versatile normal lens.
- For a bit more magnification, try it with a non-Canon 1.4x TC, e.g. the Tamron. Still retains infinity focus, now 1.4:1 magnification.

The only thing I don't like is that Canon does not include the hood, and it is $40 separately.
04/16/2004 09:32:34 AM · #4
How about the Canon 50mm, f/1.8?
Or the 50mm, f/1.4 if the money is not a problem?

Message edited by author 2004-04-16 09:33:25.
 04/16/2004 09:39:32 AM · #5
The EF 100mm f/2.8 USM is probably the least specialized macro lens. Optically it is excellent and the price isn̢۪t too bad.

Greg
04/16/2004 09:53:06 AM · #6
I love my Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro lens. I got it over the Sigma for a few reasons:

Full time manual focus
1:1 magnification
Can get .3 inches closer than the Sigma
From the research I did, the Canon was rated higher
AF is lighting fast

Optically it is an awesome lens and it performs wonderfully.

Both of these images were taken with that lens.



Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 are not technically macro lenses.

Actually the Sigma is also 1:1 magnification ...

Message edited by author 2004-04-16 10:13:30.
 04/16/2004 10:01:16 AM · #7
Not to mention that the Canon is internal focusing and does not use that boneheaded clutch mechanism to switch from AF to MF that the Sigma 105 macro uses.

Greg
04/16/2004 10:13:41 AM · #8
Originally posted by tfaust:

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 are not technically macro lenses.


I´m not sure. Probably they better for portraits than for macro but on the Digital Canons the equals around 80mm in 35mm format (as you all know).

By the way tfaust, great images. Is it possible that in the butterfly image you have put a litle extra blurr to the background in PS? Method that I often use myself but under some circumstances you have to take care to retouch the edges carefully. Maybe it´s just showing the extreamly shallow DOF you are using but I find the edges of the wings a litle strange.
 04/16/2004 10:17:36 AM · #9
I have been most impressed with the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro lens. It is 1:1 and it works great for other applications as well.
 04/16/2004 10:20:37 AM · #10
garlic, I'm not a real PS power user yet and only know the basics of color correction, healing/cloning, etc. I'm not real savvy on using some the advanced features. You are right, there was some haloing on the wings, and I did fix that in my printable image. This was an open challenge, so I couldn't do that type of editing on it.

The 50mm is an excellent portrait lens... it's not classified as a macro lens though.
 04/16/2004 10:23:26 AM · #11
I was in the local camera store (Henry's) the other day and asked about the Tamron 90, Sigma 105 and Canon 100 macro lenses. Of the three they said the Sigma was the best and Canon the worst (though none of them are bad) of the three. The Sigma also costs $300 cdn less than the Canon.
 04/16/2004 11:01:55 AM · #12
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I was in the local camera store (Henry's) the other day and asked about the Tamron 90, Sigma 105 and Canon 100 macro lenses. Of the three they said the Sigma was the best and Canon the worst (though none of them are bad) of the three. The Sigma also costs $300 cdn less than the Canon.


I normally don't trust the opinion of a store salesperson; it certainly may be that they have more margin in the Sigma.
All of these are great lenses optically. No one would be dissatsfied with the image quality from any of them. As far as build quality, I again don't think there is a significant difference, at least in perceived build quality.
As far as versatility, THATS where the canon version shines. With the USM, full-time manual focusing, and dual range AF it focuses fast and accurately in normal use, and AF can be instantly overriden without fumbling for a switch.
As posted by dadas115, the Sigma's mechanism for switching between manual and auto focus is a bit strange. I haven't read an opinion from anyone who's actually LIKED the Sigma arrangement.
Since the original poster emphasized versatility, the Canon version seems to me to be the one to beat.
A final thought; if you're investing in lenses for the long haul, bear in mind that Sigma does not have a license for the Canon mount, which means they "reverse engineered" the communications protocol. That's why sometimes Sigma lenses need to be re-chipped for new Canon bodies. Some older Sigma lenses cannot be rechipped. End result is the lens may very well have a shorter useful life because of future incompatibility.
 04/16/2004 11:03:04 AM · #13
So how close are we talking about with a 1:1 ratio, how big will an ant look?
 04/16/2004 11:04:53 AM · #14
I'm narrowing it down to I guess the Sigma 105mm. Sounds to be a great lens, just need reinforcement...haha.
04/16/2004 11:07:43 AM · #15
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I was in the local camera store (Henry's) the other day and asked about the Tamron 90, Sigma 105 and Canon 100 macro lenses. Of the three they said the Sigma was the best and Canon the worst (though none of them are bad) of the three. The Sigma also costs $300 cdn less than the Canon.


I̢۪ve tried all three and found quite the opposite to be true. The Sigma was by far the worst and the Canon was the best. I wonder if Henry̢۪s has a bunch of Sigma 105̢۪s in inventory and no Canon 100̢۪s.

Greg
04/16/2004 11:11:51 AM · #16
One other thing to consider is that the Canon is an internal focus lens (the barrel does not extend when focusing). This can be a HUGE benefit when photographing bugs and small animals as they are easily scared by this hug black thing barreling down at them from above as you are trying to focus as close as you can.

Greg
04/16/2004 11:13:02 AM · #17
Originally posted by JackCruise:
So how close are we talking about with a 1:1 ratio, how big will an ant look?


At 1:1, a 5mm (0.197 inch) long ant will be 5mm long on the sensor (thus the 1:1 notation)
That would make it 33.5mm (1.3 inches) long when the full image is printed at 4x6 inches, for example.
 04/16/2004 11:28:15 AM · #18
Originally posted by tfaust:
garlic, I'm not a real PS power user yet and only know the basics of color correction, healing/cloning, etc. I'm not real savvy on using some the advanced features. You are right, there was some haloing on the wings, and I did fix that in my printable image. This was an open challenge, so I couldn't do that type of editing on it.

The 50mm is an excellent portrait lens... it's not classified as a macro lens though.


tfaust.
You are right and your images are very good.
 04/16/2004 11:34:00 AM · #19
Originally posted by JackCruise:
So how close are we talking about with a 1:1 ratio, how big will an ant look?


Jacko uses the sigma 105 and he gets far far too close on his bug macros. If you peruse his portfolio and see a close-up bug then it's likely done with that lens.

An example:


04/16/2004 11:37:34 AM · #20
Originally posted by dadas115:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I was in the local camera store (Henry's) the other day and asked about the Tamron 90, Sigma 105 and Canon 100 macro lenses. Of the three they said the Sigma was the best and Canon the worst (though none of them are bad) of the three. The Sigma also costs $300 cdn less than the Canon.


I̢۪ve tried all three and found quite the opposite to be true. The Sigma was by far the worst and the Canon was the best. I wonder if Henry̢۪s has a bunch of Sigma 105̢۪s in inventory and no Canon 100̢۪s.

Greg


They actually had both the Sigma and the Canon in stock.

Kirbic,

Henry's did mention that there is no margin (small) on the Canon whereas there is a margin on the Sigma which allows them to offer the camera club discount on it and not the Canon.

I must go off and do some more comparisons for myself.
 04/16/2004 11:40:19 AM · #21
Originally posted by dadas115:
[...]does not use that boneheaded clutch mechanism to switch from AF to MF that the Sigma 105 macro uses.


Yes, having to flip a switch and push/pull the clutch just to go from AF to MF (or back) is lame. It focuses to infinity and stupidity.
04/16/2004 12:27:15 PM · #22
Here̢۪s a couple of shots I took with the EF 100mm f/2.8 macro. This is nearly the full frame scaled down.

//www.pbase.com/image/18492863

//www.pbase.com/image/18492850

Greg

Message edited by author 2004-04-16 12:29:34.
 04/16/2004 12:28:48 PM · #23
Originally posted by dadas115:
Here̢۪s a shot I took with the EF 100mm f/2.8 macro. This is nearly the full frame scaled down.

Greg


What was the aperture setting at?
 04/16/2004 12:51:47 PM · #24
The first one was at f/22, the second at f/11

Greg
 04/16/2004 01:03:59 PM · #25
Originally posted by dadas115:
The first one was at f/22, the second at f/11

Greg


Thanks Greg. I asked since I noticed that rear left leg on the ant to be slightly out of focus. I am surprised that it is f/22... but I don't know much about macro photography.
So at f/8.0 for instance I assume only parts of the ant would have been in focus?

Message edited by author 2004-04-16 13:04:20.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/10/2025 07:34:23 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 09/10/2025 07:34:23 PM EDT.