LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro

FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive
Thread started 23 Nov 2006 (Thursday) 02:41   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
Pat
Senior Member
Pat's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
180 posts
Port Stephens, NSW Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

Has anyone used this lens? would like to see some photos and opinions.

Post #1, Nov 23, 2006 02:41:31


Canon 5D11 with various lenses, mostly primes.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
mrkgoo
Goldmember
Joined Aug 2006
2,288 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I don't think anyone has ever used this lens.  :p


Kidding, I have it and it's one of my favourites. A great focal length, since it's only very slightly tele (equiv of about 90mm), it's superb for so many applications - portraits, landscape, general purpose...oh yeah, and macro.

It's fast at 2.8, has really nice build, and EXTREMELY sharp! Perhaps my sharpest lens. Awesome size and weight too. I think the ONLY problem I have with it is that it's focussing is slightly on the slow side (fast for a macro, but macro lenses tend to be slightly slower for that extra accuracy. Or something). Oh, it has reaosonably bad light fall off at 2.8, but only when taking non-macro.

Some unedited samples:

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img220.imagesha​ck.us/img220/2012/img0​567ey6.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img208.imagesha​ck.us/img208/2241/img2​683ka2.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img220.imagesha​ck.us/img220/2894/img2​825kr4.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img220.imagesha​ck.us/img220/6476/img4​359au1.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img220.imagesha​ck.us/img220/466/img54​20am0.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Post #2, Nov 23, 2006 03:18:07




LOG IN TO REPLY
Pat
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Pat's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
180 posts
Port Stephens, NSW Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

Thanks for that! I am impressed :)

Post #3, Nov 23, 2006 03:45:41 as a reply to mrkgoo's post 27 minutes earlier.


Canon 5D11 with various lenses, mostly primes.

LOG IN TO REPLY
J ­ Rabin
Goldmember
Joined Aug 2004
1,496 posts
NJ
[MORE/SHARE]

People who carp about EF-S lenses carp. People who use this lens recognize its optical performance is truly something special in Canon's lens lineup. This is my writeup:http://postit.rutgers.​edu ...ro%5FWork%5FDistanc​e1.pdfexternal link.
Here's a typical shot: http://aesop.rutgers.e​du ...yBreeding_DMerritt_​52.htmexternal link

I am an old 1970s Olympus OM guy (great macro optics for those remembering the 90mm f/2) who became a Nikon guy in the autofocus 90s and appreciated Nikon's 60mm f/2.8 micro Nikkor for portability, who became a never look back Canon digital guy, and waited to Canon to make a 60mm macro.
They did. Just happens to be EF-S. This lens is so good, alone it made me keep an APS-C sensor body instead of moving to a 5D! It trounces the 60mm micro Nikkor and even the legendary Oly 90 f/2 in performance. It's that good.
Jack

Post #4, Nov 23, 2006 07:09:28 as a reply to Pat's post 3 hours earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
kidpower
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2005
513 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I think the guys above said it all. It's an oustanding lens. I only rarely shoot macro with it and use it for general out and about photos.

It has a perfect, solid feel on my XT, and is very very sharp.

Post #5, Nov 23, 2006 07:20:34 as a reply to J Rabin's post 11 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Lightstream
Yoda
Joined Feb 2006
14,915 posts
Cult of the Full Frame
[MORE/SHARE]

J Rabin wrote in post #2303065external link
They did. Just happens to be EF-S. This lens is so good, alone it made me keep an APS-C sensor body instead of moving to a 5D! It trounces the 60mm micro Nikkor and even the legendary Oly 90 f/2 in performance. It's that good.
Jack


That's why I am having such a difficult time deciding whether I want to sell this lens to move to the 100mm macro. Its performance is absolutely mind blowing - and this little EF-S lens scares all the L's in my gear bag.

I like it so much I adapted it to fit the 1D 1.3X crop factor platform, although I did not succeed in moving it to full frame because the mirror is simply too big to clear the rear element.

Interesting observation: It DOES NOT vignette on a 1D. There is enough image area that completely black vignetting is absent, although there is minor light falloff at normal working distances wide open (although some have noted this is a concern at f/2.8 normal tele range on a 1.6X platform too)

Post #6, Nov 23, 2006 07:28:21




LOG IN TO REPLY
George ­ Chew
Goldmember
George Chew's Avatar
Joined Nov 2004
1,635 posts
Ipoh, Malaysia
[MORE/SHARE]

Greetings,
This is the sharpest lens I had. I have to let it go very reluctantly as I upgrade to 5D. This is the parting shot. Enjoy...

IMAGE: http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f367/gckw8833/Flower/_MG_0692.jpg

Post #7, Nov 23, 2006 08:22:14 as a reply to Lightstream's post 53 minutes earlier.


5DII and a few L lenses.

LOG IN TO REPLY
aladyforty
Goldmember
aladyforty's Avatar
Joined Dec 2005
2,991 posts
Albany: Western Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

as everyone has said before, its a great sharp lens. I wont part with mine.

Post #8, Nov 23, 2006 09:16:32


5DIII 7D, 1DIII 50F1.2L EF 8-15L 100 f2.8L 135 f2L 200 f2.8L 24-70 f2.8L :100-400L 70-200f4L 17-40 f4L
Tamron 150-600 http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/juliehollan​d/sets/external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
kidpower
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2005
513 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Here is a flower shot with the 60 EFS macro. XT, F8, ISO 100, 1/40, crop, RAW, sharpened some. I shoot very little macro and there is probably camera shake in this photo as it's hard to steady the hands bending over and crouching. I should have upped the shutter speed. For the serious macro person with tripod and all that, it's capable of stunning results.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #9, Nov 23, 2006 09:21:57 as a reply to George Chew's post 59 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
condyk's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
20,848 posts
Birmingham, UK
[MORE/SHARE]

This lens is really very good indeed in all respects, including build. Ultra sharp, sharpest I've ever had, and capable of genuine 3D poppin' looking shots. AF is on the slow side and tends to hunt, but it is a Macro and they all seem to be the same. I use MF for Macro anyway.

I posted some fast and loose samples here: Click

Post #10, Nov 23, 2006 12:31:17


http://photography-on-the.net .../showthread.php?t=1​203740

LOG IN TO REPLY
illy
Senior Member
illy's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
649 posts
London
[MORE/SHARE]

My Favourite Lens.

FOV is around 96mm on the crops so it equals out to the 100mm macro on a FF. An effective 100mm FOV makes it a good portraiture lens (mainly what I use it for), the bokeh is smooth and creamy - a problem you may encounter when shooting in bright light is that when you stop down to f/5.6 - f/8.0 it becomes too sharp and people might complain about the texture of their skin - isn't that a great disadvantage ... too sharp :lol:

The AF is smooth and silent ... USM ... I haven't many lenses to compare the speed to so I can't really say. In low light I use it with my flash so that it focuses with the assist light.

The lens is very well built; I've dragged mine everywhere and have only have a couple of scratches. I recommend getting the hood with it, it’s very good, and protects the lens well (of course remove for macro) - also flare is very well controlled, even without the hood.

If you want a good macro lens (may be too short for some insects ... its more an object macro lens) that can double up for portraiture, tack sharp, well built, cheap, good bokeh, go for this one.

Here is my gallery - all the pics are with this lens:

http://beta.zooomr.com​/photos/iliaexternal link

Have a look here at some 100% crops with modest sharpening applied in PS (shot in RAW):

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img69.imageshac​k.us/img69/3764/1rp9.j​pgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'



IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img76.imageshac​k.us/img76/3135/2jf1.j​pgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'



IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://img55.imageshac​k.us/img55/1070/3sn7.j​pgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Post #11, Nov 23, 2006 12:59:14 as a reply to condyk's post 27 minutes earlier.


Flickrexternal link
600D, 17-50, 50, 60, 100, 70-200, 430EX

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
paulhillion
Goldmember
paulhillion's Avatar
Joined Jun 2004
1,392 posts
Guernsey, UK
[MORE/SHARE]

There's been a couple of times when I've thought of selling my 60 macro but then I look back on some of the images it produces and I quickly come to my senses. It's an amazing lens and probably one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used.

Post #12, Nov 23, 2006 14:18:24


Website: Clickexternal link
Twitter: Clickexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
kevin_c
Cream of the Crop
Joined Mar 2005
5,745 posts
Devon, England
[MORE/SHARE]

As everyone else has said - Get it! I use mine mainly for portraits (human & cats!) but it is a great macro as well :-)

Post #13, Nov 23, 2006 14:23:21


-- K e v i n --

Nikon D700, 17-35mm, 28-105mm, 70-200mmVR, 50mm f/1.4
Canon EOS 3, 24-105L, 135L

LOG IN TO REPLY
Max ­ Err
Hatchling
Joined Nov 2006
9 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

great lens no doubt, I bought it to pair to my 135L when shooting portraits in confined spaces (on 400d) - well, being great it is still not quite up to the 135L image quality - looking at 100% crops you notice the difference: at 200ISO the former produces more noise in the shadowed areas giving the image a lesser detailed look (more grainy) - this is my cautious verbalization of the lack of "magic" the 135L has and the ef-s60mm hasn't.
but if you consider the price difference it is all nonsense :) and you cant make a true macro with the 135L.

considering macro capabilities this lens is great for everything except fast and nervous insects - you must be too close to them to shoot at 60mm, so if it is the bugs you're after, consider something with a longer working distance (100,150,180 mm).

a flower at 2.8
http://www.pbase.com ...age/70662036/origin​al.jpgexternal link

Post #14, Nov 23, 2006 14:48:07




LOG IN TO REPLY
Bonjour43ma
Senior Member
Bonjour43ma's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
192 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

nice

Post #15, Nov 23, 2006 15:43:47


Ron from Vancouver, Canada
---------------
I have a camera and some lenses and I take pictures with them.

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
441,767 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00081 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
751 guests, 575 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is ctx888

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.