Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 31 Oct 2014 (Friday) 22:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Stabilized Macro options for FF

 
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Oct 31, 2014 22:32 |  #1

I already have the excellent 60/2.8 but I want to start prepping for a full frame move. So I am looking at FF macro options and want to stick to the stabilized ones. While I am still on crop, this lens will be pretty much used for only macro subjects like bugs, flowers, miniature items. Once I make the FF move, it will be used for portraiture as well.

So options in order that and leaning toward:
100L IS
90 VC
105 OS

The Sigma 150 OS and 180 OS are out there too but I'm thinking that they are too big.

I'd like to hear people's opinions on these especially if you've used more than one.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Photo123abc
Member
236 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Finland
     
Nov 01, 2014 10:27 |  #2

I have used Canon 100mm L IS and non-IS versions and also had 90mm Tamron along with my current macro lens (Sigma 105mm OS). I really cant tell the diffrence in image quality with Sigma and Canon, maybe there is slight diffrence when doing side-by-side comparison.

100L has better weather sealing than Sigma 105, but it can hold up pretty well in damp conditions. Ive shot in rain on a damp swamp and my camera was quite soaked because humidity was so hing. No problem. Sigma's OS is also louder however that doesnt make a diffrence if youre shooting bugs. I would get Sigma simply because its cheaper and very similar in IQ than Canon. If you dont mind the noise in OS and you dont shoot in pouring rain go for Sigma.


You are what you eat - I dont remember eating a photographer.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Nov 01, 2014 10:45 as a reply to  @ Photo123abc's post |  #3

Thanks for the feedback. I would imagine that for macro the IQ between all of them would be very simular because you're stopped down so much for DOF. However wide open when doing portraits, at least from reviews I have seen, the advantage seems to be with the 100L. The almost $300 difference has me second guessing especially since I have the 85/1.8 and 135/2 for portraits I wouldn't have to use this macro for portraits as much.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Nov 01, 2014 10:51 |  #4

I've only used the Canon 100L, but the Sigma is nice. Some say the Siggy is slightly sharper across the whole frame compared to the Canon. Never considered the Tamron (comparison on "the digital picture" had it noticeably not as sharp as either of the other two - even if it is only one random copy of each lens tested).

I wanted/needed the ability to use a tripod collar (purchased an off brand one online the same day that I bought the L). If not, I would likely have went with a Sigma; and bought when it is on sale (then it is a significant savings - over the Canon or when not on sale).

The one drawback is since I always carry the 100L, the 85mm and the 135L often don't go (or only one goes usually the 85). I figured I would mention this since you have both these lenses too!

The Sigma 150mm is way too close to the 135L, and I definitly couldn't justify both. I'd love to have the Sigma 180mm. I don't care about its size, I just can't justify its cost right now.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,222 posts
Gallery: 416 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 19722
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Nov 01, 2014 10:59 |  #5

FEChariot wrote in post #17244892 (external link)
I already have the excellent 60/2.8 but I want to start prepping for a full frame move. So I am looking at FF macro options and want to stick to the stabilized ones. While I am still on crop, this lens will be pretty much used for only macro subjects like bugs, flowers, miniature items. Once I make the FF move, it will be used for portraiture as well.

So options in order that and leaning toward:
100L IS
90 VC
105 OS

The Sigma 150 OS and 180 OS are out there too but I'm thinking that they are too big.

I'd like to hear people's opinions on these especially if you've used more than one.

You want to use the EF-S 60mm on FF? ???

All macro lenses are very sharp. But usually when doing macro work, we stop down to small apertures. That causes some loss of sharpness in all lenses due to diffraction, with all macro lenses ending up performing about the same. So there is no point in selecting a macro lens on the basis of its sharpness.

So pick your lens based on brand, ruggedness, features, image stabilization, focusing speed, working distance, and so on.

I bought the Canon 100mm non-IS and did not like it. IS is actually not that useful at 1:1 shooting, but much of my shooting is at lower magnification where IS is very useful. So returned it the next day for the IS version and like it much better.

The 100mm lens gives a working distance that makes some bugs a bit uncomfortable, but usually I can get the shot. Working at relatively short distances gives more options for conveniently using soft flash lighting, and that is a big advantage. (I'm finding that lighting is the biggest issue when doing macro.)

Accordingly, the lens choice may be affected by things like what kind of subjects you will be shooting, and how you will be lighting them.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Nov 01, 2014 11:13 |  #6

Archibald wrote in post #17245599 (external link)
You want to use the EF-S 60mm on FF? ???

I will sell the 60 to help fund the FF when I am ready.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,222 posts
Gallery: 416 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 19722
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Nov 01, 2014 11:23 |  #7

FEChariot wrote in post #17245622 (external link)
I will sell the 60 to help fund the FF when I am ready.

Most macro shooters use APS-C. You might have some regrets of you dump your APS-C gear.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Nov 01, 2014 11:27 |  #8

Archibald wrote in post #17245659 (external link)
Most macro shooters use APS-C. You might have some regrets of you dump your APS-C gear.

Well I will be keeping my 7D and could use the new longer macro lens with it. I was thinking the added working distance would be handy over the 60.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Nov 01, 2014 13:46 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

I had the 100mm f/2.8 Macro non-L. I sold it when I got the 60mm f/2.8. I find the 60 on crop to be easier to work with than the 100 of full-frame. It is also an excellent portrait lens on crop.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2slo
Cream of the Crop
6,579 posts
Gallery: 609 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 5686
Joined Oct 2011
     
Nov 02, 2014 06:14 as a reply to  @ GeoKras1989's post |  #10

I recently bought the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 after trying the Canon 100 and Sigma 105mm. The latter two were very good but the extra reach of the 180 plus the ability to stay back from insects etc which are easily startled made the decision for me. Build quality of the 2 Sigma macros was beyond reproach. The 180 weighs about the same as Canons 70-200mm f/2.8 which I also own which might make it too heavy for some.
Have a look at the 180 thread here: https://photography-on-the.net …35574&highlight​=sigma+180 and also the Flickr group for the lens here: https://www.flickr.com​/groups/2124175@N25/ (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Nov 02, 2014 13:00 |  #11

Among other macros, I have and use the Canon EF 100/2.8... and I don't plan to "upgrade" to the 100L IS.

For one thing, stabilization is of limited use at macro magnifications. The 100L IS uses a hybrid form of stabilization that's probably the best system on any macro lens, but it's only good for roughly 1 stop or less of assistance at 1:1 magnification. Most other macro lenses with some form of stabilization (Nikon 105 VR; Tamron 90 VC; Sigma 105 OS, 150 OS and 180 OS) give virtually no assistance at 1:1, and only a little at 1:2.

The stabilization is more likely to be helpful if using the lens at non-macro distances, such as for portraits. But for macro work I'd rather put my money into a tripod mounting ring, than spend it just to get stabilization.

However, personally I also don't particularly like macro lenses for portraits. They are simply too sharp and don't enjoy large enough aperture for extremely shallow depth of field/strong background blur effects. Instead of my 100/2.8 macro, I use 85/1.8 or 135/2 for portraits, which have 1.33 and 1 stop advantages, respectively. Stopped down a little, both of those lenses are plenty sharp for portraits, without being ridiculously so. Wide open, they both have ability to strongly blur down a background... the 135mm in particular.

Image quality and build quality of the two Canon 100mm are virtually the same. Both can be fitted with tripod mounting rings (a BIG selling point IMO). Both are internal focusing (IF) lenses, same as your EF-S 60mm, so they don't grow larger when focused closer (but start out larger and actually change their "true" focal length a little during focusing).

The 100L IS costs $950 and comes with a matching lens hood, but not the tripod ring. That's sold separately... $172 for the Canon OEM Tripod Ring D.

The 100/2.8 USM costs $600, but doesn't include the matching hood... it's another $36 for that. The Tripod Ring B for it costs $140.

The 100L IS might have slightly better background blur, thanks to a 9-blade aperture. The 100/2.8 USM uses an 8-blade aperture. AFAIK neither lens uses curved aperture blades.

The 100L IS uses 67mm filters, while the 100/2.8 USM uses 58mm.

The 100L IS has a three-range focus limiter, while the 100/2.8 USM has a two-range limiter. Both have USM, which is reasonably fast, but not as instantaneous as non-macro USM lenses around the same focal length. I wouldn't use either for sports shooting, for example.

Besides the EF 100/2.8 USM (with tripod ring & hood), other macro lenses I use personally are: Tamron SP 60/2.0(crop only), Canon MP-E 65mm, Tamron SP 90mm f2.8 (vintage/manual focus), and Canon EF 180/3.5L USM. I also frequently use Canon TS-E 45mm and Canon EF 300/4L IS USM for near macro/close-up work.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Nov 02, 2014 13:17 as a reply to  @ 2slo's post |  #12

I think the 180 OS would be too specialized for me to put that much money in. The options around 100mm will get more use in non macro applications and thus get more overall use. I think once I get to the point where my children are not needing expensive day care that I might add a 180mm macro lens to my collection but for now my cash flow can't justify it.

I did take a look the the lens sample forum at each of the 5 lenses I listed about plus the 180L and I was very shocked to see how few examples of the third party options compaired to the Canons. The Tammy and Siggy threads only had like 3 or 4 pages each where as the 100L had over 400 pages. The 180L has over 25. I didn't see a quality difference that large to suggest such a difference in popularity for sure.

One thing I remember from a Rudy Winston video on the 7D was that in servo mode it increased the AF sampling rate like 3 times more when using dedicated Canon macro lenses. Does anyone know if the 5D3 or 6D have this feature now? How about the 7D2? I would assume it would. That alone might make me pick the 100L over the others.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,222 posts
Gallery: 416 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 19722
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Nov 02, 2014 13:29 |  #13

FEChariot wrote in post #17247891 (external link)
... in servo mode it increased the AF sampling rate like 3 times more when using dedicated Canon macro lenses.

???
Could you explain?


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Nov 02, 2014 14:20 as a reply to  @ Archibald's post |  #14

Alan- never thought about using a TSE lens for macro. I see that the 90 with a 25mm tube gives a .6 ratio and it would be really cool to play with the tilt and shift. Do you have any macro samples with the 45 you could post?


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Nov 02, 2014 14:25 |  #15

Archibald wrote in post #17247909 (external link)
???
Could you explain?

I can't find a link but Rudy Winston gave a presentation in like 09 at the B&H event space talking about the 7D. It's been a while so I may not be be 100% accurate but when using a Canon macro lens at like .3 to life size in servo mode, the 7D increases it's sampling rate by like 2 or 3 times as often to more frequently make corrections to the focus. It's very helpful when shooting flowers that are moving back and forth in the wind.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,970 views & 0 likes for this thread
Stabilized Macro options for FF
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is rsturboguy
842 guests, 343 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.