Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro

[yankees3791]

I was looking into getting this lens and was wondering what you guys think about it...I think it is a nice piece of glass...i don't think i would want the 100mm macro because of size and weight and I don't mind getting up close to the objects I want to photograph...

[Dave-M]

It's a fantastic lens, very sharp, pretty lightweight, I love mine :D

[El Duderino]

It's sharp as hell. I doubt anyone here will say anything bad about it. Maybe that you have to get close to objects, but you don't mind.

[yankees3791]

thanks a lot...do you have any sample pixs that really show the sharpness...also if you wouldn't mind could you take a pix of it on your camera, I want to see how compact it is...thanks!

[mrkgoo]

I love this lens. It is so much sharper than my other lens, all the way out to the edges. It's light weight, and a very good macro lens for products shots (you can often set up the camera and product on the same table). The working distance is short - insects you may have to get a lot closer than you'd like, but this can be an advantage - it means you can take some nice portrait photos in an intimate setting (100mm can sometimes be too long).

You can also use the built in flash to illuminate your subject - something I heard can be difficult with the 100mm (Not sure why - I don't have that lens).

The only IQ issues are light fall-off (vignetting) at 2.8, and kind of slow focus (slow in regards to other USM, but still fast) - I assume this is because it needs to be for macro lenses. But again, this lens makes for a great portrait lens - it's not too long and can even be a versatile walkaround option.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1379/925226834_3f887ed1f8.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1426/924400087_902dbb2284_o.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1230/1236853879_f73796a9a3_o.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1396/1426578550_e46908b250.jpg?v=0

http://i26.tinypic.com/i44w0h.jpg

http://i27.tinypic.com/35a7y3n.jpg

[AlphaChicken]

how is the 100mm that much heavier? I have it and it doesnt seem heavy to me. I havnt compared it to the 60mm but my 100 doesnt seem heavy. IDK I know that my 100 gives me some extra reach, can do 1:1 macro, and is SHARP.

Just some counterpoint to consider, not dissing the 60 or anything. :)

[yankees3791]

nice pixs...i think i will use it for macro more than a "general" lens, because i have a 28-105 and a 50mm..

[Eric&Susan]

I just got mine about 3 hours ago and love it. This thing is damn sharp. Wanted to shoot some flowers and what not outside but the damn wind always picks up in the evening here.

Eric

[picturecrazy]

I personally think it's the winning choice for a 1.6 crop.

It's got ALL the sharpness of the 100mm macro. It's also just as fast at 2.8.
But because it's shorter, it's a lot easier to handhold it. 1/40 with your elbow on the ground or table is totally doable. I had a much harder time handholding the 100mm because it's tough to get 1/100 shutter when you're shooting at F/16 or higher like is usual in macro work.

It's also a little cheaper, and about half the size and weight. I think it's a clear winner for 1.6.

[yankees3791]

thanks picturecrazy ....thats my exact feelings towards it...i don't want the weight and size of the 100mm, its nice to have a compact setup for once! to me it sounds like a good deal...I just wanted to make sure the IQ was up to par with the 100mm f/2.8

[AlphaChicken]

the IQ is. I dont see how its harder to handhold it. Its harder for me when there isnt that much substance there. the weight is kind of a balance thing, kinda like how chefs custom weight their knives. i guess it just depends on the person.

To the OP: have you actually held both the lenses on YOUR camera body to see how they feel? what I would do is find a store thats close if you can and see how each feels... that is, if weight and balance is the deciding factor here.

the thing i am worried about is that macro is addicting. you will get the start off lens to see how it is and then you will find that you want to take some more shots of a different kind. well with the 100mm or w/e you can always add distance from your subject for a wider crop, but if you are doing any kind of living creature you will find it hard to add range to your lens.

[johngpt]

I just got mine about 3 hours ago and love it. This thing is damn sharp. Wanted to shoot some flowers and what not outside but the damn wind always picks up in the evening here.

Eric

Eric, if the wind isn't too great (as it often is here in the Albuquerque area), you might try tying down the stem of the flower to an out of view support stick. If the wind is too fierce, then even the short stem from tie down to flower will still allow too much movement.

With a short macro like the 60mm, I've seen some folks use C clamps with a rod from the tripod to the flower's stem.

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

One thing to consider. If you're using it for macro photos, like extreme close ups, you'll probably want to use small apertures such as f8, f11, and f16 etc, which will likely require the use of a tripod to keep the camera absolutely STILL. Therefore, the weight issue between the 100mm f2.8 macro, and the 60mm f2.8 macro may not be that significant.

Also, if you happen to purchase a 1D, 1Ds, or 5D series camera, the 100mm f2.8 macro is compatible with it, whereas the EF-S 60mm f2.8 macro is not.

Just a few things to think about.

[Naturalist]

The EF-S 60 is an excellent lens! I pretty much use it as my standard "normal" lens as I get super portraits and wonderful macros.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3028/2356933020_8456ccd093.jpg

DO NOT pass up this lens!!!! :D

[gasrocks]

Only real downside to the ef-s 60 is the fact that it is an ef-s lens and that 60mm doesn't give you a lot of working distance. Otherwise great.

[wimg]

Only real downside to the ef-s 60 is the fact that it is an ef-s lens and that 60mm doesn't give you a lot of working distance. Otherwise great.
Still a lot more WD than most lenses from the 3rd party competition: it has IF after all. The WD is a respectable 9.4 cm at 1:1, vs 14 cm for the 100 (also with IF). All other lenses in a similar focal length have to make do with less, because they lack IF.

Kind regards, Wim

[AngryCorgi]

The best "value" primes for the 1.6x bodies in order are...

#1...nifty fifty
#2... ef-s 60/2.8 macro

That is not to say the 60 is the best lens out there, but for the money its a great deal. It has beautiful bokeh, is very sharp and functions well as a portrait lens in addition to being a true 1:1 macro. The focusing accuracy was very good with this lens on my XT...a compliment for any lens paired with that AF sensor.

[number six]

Amazingly sharp lens, with very good flatness of field. That doesn't matter shooting bugs, but it's important if you're a spy shooting documents.

Here's an ordinary padlock on my workshop door:

265936

and a 100% crop:

265937

[algold]

This is a great sharp lens with a very fast (for a true macro) AF speed. It balances very well on an XT/XTi body either with or without a grip. Because the lens is quite short, you can use a build-in flash without the edge of the lens causing a shadow in the frame even at closest focus distance. Works very well as a portrait/short telephoto lens. As it's been said, if you don't need a longer working distance of the 100m macro, this lens is the winner.

Self-portrait (kind of :D) with a build-in flash:
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d125/algold9/IMG_3224_1.jpg

"Duck shot":
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d125/algold9/IMG_3318.jpg

[Bill Roberts]

It's an excellent lens, and one I miss since going to 1D series bodies. If you don't mind getting close then it's hard to find anything better. It's certainly as sharp as many L series lenses.

The only drawback I can think of is that it sometimes hunts a little finding focus, but that's not normally a problem, and you're just as likely to be using manual focus anyway with macro. If you're using a 1.6x crop body I'd highly recommend it.

cheers

[versedmb]

Some of my best shots have been with this lens; the best thing about this lens is its versatility - you can shoot so much more than macro with it. I only wish I could use it on my 5D.....




http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/213694517_RAJX5-L.jpg





http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/213921092_gDCVT-L.jpg






http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/213706482_3TGq8-L.jpg






http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/210652700_Fi4qX-L.jpg





http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/222900495_EZmxX-L.jpg





http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/227288666_6jh6U-L.jpg






http://brownphotography.smugmug.com/photos/266351033_pNaVf-L.jpg

[Dave-M]

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg231/dave_em/IMG_2219cap.jpg

[z3speed4me]

I am actually looking for a macro as well..... so I should probably buy the 60 over the 100? That seems to be the general agreement here

[Bill Roberts]

I am actually looking for a macro as well..... so I should probably buy the 60 over the 100? That seems to be the general agreement here

That depends... The OP didn't particularly want the size and weight of the 100mm macro and perhaps more importantly stated that he didn't mind getting up close to the subject. Given that critera, the 60mm is a very sensible choice. If you're using the same criteria then ok, if not then maybe the 100mm would be a better choice for you?

Both are excellent lenses.

[z3speed4me]

hmmmm.... getting close doesnt bother me... I also have a teleconverter that I would GATHER works with these lenses, if not I'll go buy some tubes

I still have a crop camera as well (40D), so 60mm would probably be better, but maybe I am making too many assumptions here, I dunno