Canon 180 Macro Lense

[Paul_Mc]

I am about to make a purchase on a macro lense - Canon 100 or 180. I would love to get the 180, but when i look for reviews or sample photos and galleries it doesn't seem to be widely used. I see more 100 lense photos than anything.

Is there a reason?

People say the 180 is more "difficult" to use and not as "practical" ?

I can assume that the 180 is better because of the working distance, about 16 inches or so compared to 6 of the 100.

But what are the "faults" of this lense? The weight? That you need to use a tripod all the time?

I want the best photos possible so using a tripod "all the time" isn't big of a deal when one has too. I'm also looking to get my photos printed, so this is more than just capturing photos for personal use.

I can't imagine why hardly anyone uses this one compared to the 100. Price?

Thanks!

[J Rabin]

OK. No one else answered your Q. I'm an entomologist who shoots insect and plant diseases. You already answered your own question. IT'S THE WORKING DISTANCE. You've listed the reasons. The 180 macro is an exceptional professional macro lens.
First go to Steve Hoffmann's Canon macro site. I think it's sphoto.com.
1. The 180mm is too expensive for amateurs.
2. The 180mm is too heavy for amateurs. It weighs more than a kilo and you need a heavy 5-6 lb tripod and solid head to use it right. You'll need focusing rails for tripod head.
3. The 180mm is a "single purpose" lens. The 100mm macro doubles as a fabulous medium TF portrait lens. The 180 does not double duty.
3. The 180 is about 0.5 stop slower, so it focuses less easy. Viewfinder less bright. Problem on dSLR. No problem on film camera. This is only an issue focusing and DoF checking, not shooting, because it will be mounted on a tripod and stopped down.

Why own the 180mm macro? You said the biggie: it's THE WORKING DISTANCE. The 180mm provides better working distance while still getting 1:1 life size reproduction (and yes it is still 1:1 on dSLR no matter the comments on web sites).
The 50mm macro is decent, but you need to be too close (23cm from sensor to image) just to get 1:2 ratio. I would never use it. The 100mm macro gives more working distance AND 1:1; 31cm from sensor to image. Even with this working distance, you block light and scare critters. Blocking light with short distance is bigger problem than most people consider.
The 180mm gives a whopping 48cm from sensor to image for 1:1 repro.
All my professors used bellows on rails. People still do this, but mostly bringing the objects indoors under controlled lighting. Too them, even the 1:1 didn't cut it. Canon even makes an interesting greater than 1:1 lens to avoid carrying a bellows in the field, but it only works with pro bodies.

The 100mm seems to be the best compromise for non-professional use. And it is a fine lens. I own it. My colleagues pine for the 180 for the working distance. The purists still use bellows. Check Hoffmann's site.

[MarkH]

I am about to make a purchase on a macro lense - Canon 100 or 180. I would love to get the 180, but when i look for reviews or sample photos and galleries it doesn't seem to be widely used. I see more 100 lense photos than anything.

Is there a reason?

People say the 180 is more "difficult" to use and not as "practical" ?

I can assume that the 180 is better because of the working distance, about 16 inches or so compared to 6 of the 100.

But what are the "faults" of this lense? The weight? That you need to use a tripod all the time?

I want the best photos possible so using a tripod "all the time" isn't big of a deal when one has too. I'm also looking to get my photos printed, so this is more than just capturing photos for personal use.

I can't imagine why hardly anyone uses this one compared to the 100. Price?

Thanks!

I have read on this forum that the Canon 100mm macro is one of the sharpest lenses in the lineup, that and the cheaper price make it a good choice. Often if the results are excellent from the cheaper option then the majority of us will happily save some money (which we will spend on another lens of course).