Macro Lens, any suggestion?

[RaymondCheung]

I am thinking of getting a Macro lens. Between EF100mm f/2.8 USM and EF180mm f/3.5 L USM, which one will you choose?

[clicky]

If you do alot of macro and need the extra range, go for the 180. The 100 mm is brilliant though, both in sharpness, contrast, bookeh and so on. In addition its a very suitable lens, both macro and medium tele/portrait.

[Dante King]

on a budget. Tamron 90sp 2.8 . Love it. Damn sharp lens, stopped down and open.

[tim]

What do you want to take photos of Raymond?

[RaymondCheung]

I plan to have some close up shots about the nature

[J Rabin]

I am thinking of getting a Macro lens. Between EF100mm f/2.8 USM and EF180mm f/3.5 L USM, which one will you choose?

I've used all these lenses. They are all brutally sharp. The new Sigma 150mm f/2.8 is very good, if it fits your needs. Here's the way to think about working distance when these lenses are focused at full 1:1 magnification:

60mm Canon = 10 cm working distance @ $450
100mm Canon = 15 cm working distance @ $480
150mm Sigma = 20 cm working distance @ $620
180mm Canon = 25 cm working distance @ $1,300

You only pay $30 to add 5 cm of working distance from Canon's 60 to 100mm macro lenses. Unless you need the 60mm for a specific use (I do at work), the 100mm Canon macro is a best all around value in working distance and flexible use for most people. Due to the floating internal elements, the Canon 100mm has a shorter internal focal length at 1:1, probably around 70-80mm, keeping the field of view nice while still getting the 14.9 cm distance.

To step up, you pay additional $140 for the 2nd 5cm distance gained from the Canon 100mm to the Sigma 150mm. This, and the fact the Sigma comes with a hood, tripod mount, HSM auto focus, with full-time manual over ride. (I shut off auto focus and manually focus much of the time with macro lenses) makes it an interesting middle contender.

Step up on more time, and you pay an additional $700 for the next 5 cm working distance between the Sigma 150mm and the Canon 180mm. This is an amazing optic, almost no diffraction even when stopped down to f/22-32! Ultimate in working distance. It's big and long and prefers to be used tripod mounted, except when "butterfly hunting."

What is working distance? Working distance is the distance from the front of lens element to the subject when the lenses are focuused at their closest focus 1:1 magnification. The lenses all focus continuously to infinity also, but we are only calculating close focus distance above.

Calculate Working Distance to subject =
published close focus spec for lens - lens length - distance between rear element and sensor or film plane (which is 4.4 cm for Canon EOS cameras.

Working distance is a BIG limiting use factor (in addition to the full 2 f/stops of light loss @ 1:1 magnification), so get as much as you can afford.

If you're serious about macro, do not buy any macro lens where the barrel length changes during focus. For casual macro users, this is OK (like carrying the old Canon 50mm f/2.5 in a pocket out for a hike).

When we mean macro, we mean life size reproduction, (1:1) magnification or greater. There is loads of fun "close-up" photography at less than life size, say 0.25x to 0.70x (butterfly and dragonfly hunting range) that you can do with diopters, close focusing zooms, etc. A cheap Canon XXmm-300mm zoom with a Canon 500D ($140) +2 diopter makes a good butterfly hunter, providing about 0.4-0.7x depending on focal length.

Hope that helps. J

[RaymondCheung]

I've used all these lenses. They are all brutally sharp. The new Sigma 150mm f/2.8 is very good, if it fits your needs. Here's the way to think about working distance when these lenses are focused at full 1:1 magnification:

60mm Canon = 10 cm working distance @ $450
100mm Canon = 15 cm working distance @ $480
150mm Sigma = 20 cm working distance @ $620
180mm Canon = 25 cm working distance @ $1,300

You only pay $30 to add 5 cm of working distance from Canon's 60 to 100mm macro lenses. Unless you need the 60mm for a specific use (I do at work), the 100mm Canon macro is a best all around value in working distance and flexible use for most people. Due to the floating internal elements, the Canon 100mm has a shorter internal focal length at 1:1, probably around 70-80mm, keeping the field of view nice while still getting the 14.9 cm distance.

To step up, you pay additional $140 for the 2nd 5cm distance gained from the Canon 100mm to the Sigma 150mm. This, and the fact the Sigma comes with a hood, tripod mount, HSM auto focus, with full-time manual over ride. (I shut off auto focus and manually focus much of the time with macro lenses) makes it an interesting middle contender.

Step up on more time, and you pay an additional $700 for the next 5 cm working distance between the Sigma 150mm and the Canon 180mm. This is an amazing optic, almost no diffraction even when stopped down to f/22-32! Ultimate in working distance. It's big and long and prefers to be used tripod mounted, except when "butterfly hunting."

What is working distance? Working distance is the distance from the front of lens element to the subject when the lenses are focuused at their closest focus 1:1 magnification. The lenses all focus continuously to infinity also, but we are only calculating close focus distance above.

Calculate Working Distance to subject =
published close focus spec for lens - lens length - distance between rear element and sensor or film plane (which is 4.4 cm for Canon EOS cameras.

Working distance is a BIG limiting use factor (in addition to the full 2 f/stops of light loss @ 1:1 magnification), so get as much as you can afford.

If you're serious about macro, do not buy any macro lens where the barrel length changes during focus. For casual macro users, this is OK (like carrying the old Canon 50mm f/2.5 in a pocket out for a hike).

When we mean macro, we mean life size reproduction, (1:1) magnification or greater. There is loads of fun "close-up" photography at less than life size, say 0.25x to 0.70x (butterfly and dragonfly hunting range) that you can do with diopters, close focusing zooms, etc. A cheap Canon XXmm-300mm zoom with a Canon 500D ($140) +2 diopter makes a good butterfly hunter, providing about 0.4-0.7x depending on focal length.

Hope that helps. J
Dear J Rabin,
Thank you so much for your detailed explanation and your piece has surely helped me a lot.
Cheers:D :D :D

[Dami]

Thanks from me, too. This really helped me make up my mind.

[J Rabin]

Thanks from me, too. This really helped me make up my mind.

Most welcome. I did not include the Tamron 180mm in the list. It has 26cm WD, at half Canon price. But because of its filter adjuster, I didn't try it. Was not sure if it would work with the 24EX macro flash.

[lancea]

J Rabin - Thanks from me too. My next purchase is likely to be a macro. This is very useful information all nicely put together.

[condyk]

J Rabin

That's some very nice 'sticky standard' information you've contributed there, thanks.

I just bought a mint boxed Sigma 105mm f2.8 Ex on ebay at a great price, way below what they had been selling for last few weeks, I think because bidding ended just after the FA Cup Final (that's football, i.e. 'soccer') kicked off ;-) so people otherwise engaged!!

It has rave reviews on FM forum but only due to arrive mid week. Looking forward to it as it completes my lens collection. It'll be a whole new world as never taken a macro shot in my life ... though I do peer at very small things regularly, esp. in the shower :lol: :lol: :lol: Not intended as a super serious piece of kit, but I think it'll do a very nice job for me.

[nitsch]

I just bought a mint boxed Sigma 105mm f2.8 Ex on ebay at a great price

Great lens choice Condyk! You'll love it. I've got this lens too and can highly recommend it to anyone looking for a macro lens. It opens up a whole new world, I guarantee you will be hunting round for tiny things to shoot everywhere you go! :D

[condyk]

Thanks ... I got the non DG which scores something like 9.4/10 on fredmiranda even though it's the older version. Be interesting to see how it compares with your one. I guess they will be equally good. Seems a great value for money choice SH.

Looking on the SIgma site there are some definite differences beyond the lens coating and a new couple of letters on the end of its name. Personally, the changes wheren't enough to make me think the great reviews were suddenly redundant. I prefer the external shape of the DG version: nice and clean bit of design, which is the main thing :lol: :lol:

I have always been 90% big wildlife and long zooming, mainly overseas, so I really am looking at a different world from next weekend :D I reckon I'm more likely to see some interesting small stuff in the Uk and so keep my interests up. Not much variety of wildlife left here unfortunately, unless you can find the time to travel to very out of the way areas :cry: