EF-S 60 2.8 or EF 100 2.8 USM?

[mojo_uk]

Hi everyone,

This is my first post to this forum and I'm interested to know your thoughts on what would be the best lens of the two mentioned above? I have a 20D and would like to try my hand at macro photography. My main interest would be nature/wildlife. I'm a bit worried about the camera to subject distance with the new EF-S 60mm will be too close for many creepy crawlies and thus frighten them away. What is the difference between the two lenses if any? has anyone used the EF-S 60mm for this kind of photography? What are the results like compared to the EF 100 2.8 USM?

Many thanks in advance,

Mark.:)

[Jon]

You're right - go with the 100 for the increased working distance. The prices are about the same, the apertures are the same, DoF at any given magnification will be as close as the same as never mind,so go with the better woreking distance.

[Bellarmino]

100 2.8 macro is simply beautiful :). Optically superb also at 2.8, very fast af, not heavy but very well made. Buy this one not the EF-S, maybe in the future you'll buy a 1d or 1ds (these cameras don't fit EF-S lenses).