EF-S 60 mm 2.8 macro...Should I?

idsurfer wrote in post #12770896
Boy, I keep hearing sharp, sharp, sharp...I guess I just don't know about the short working distance to get 1:1.

It is indeed very sharp. Close focus distance at 1:1 is 20cm or 0.65 feet from the sensor plane (the ø mark on the camera body). This gives about 3.5" of working distance.

Well, thanks to all the positive posts in this thread combined with the sample gallery, I placed a bid on and won an EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro lens on eBay tonight! Can't wait to get it!

I just asked about this lens here a few days ago. I'm probably going to buy one today (going to the store later). The shorter working distance of the 60mm is a big advantage for me. If I buy I'll only be able to check it for its main purpose (small musical instruments parts) later this week but might try it in a concert tonight if I'm not too lazy to take my camera with me...

i had this lens before
it was a nice lens with the 60D
but now i use the 100mm for full frame
this is a sample images

first my Carpet Fabric
with the EF-S 60mm f2.8 Macro

and see
what Canon choose for 550D,60D,7D
i made a scan of that page

Interesting...I'm not sure why they would recommend different lenses for different cameras with the same sized sensor. I'm prob. missing something here.

idsurfer wrote in post #12772356
Interesting...I'm not sure why they would recommend different lenses for different cameras with the same sized sensor. I'm prob. missing something here.

Cheap camera - Cheap lenses
Expensive camera - Expensive lenses.

hollis_f wrote in post #12772375
Cheap camera - Cheap lenses
Expensive camera - Expensive lenses.

That's what I thought!

It is a superb lens. I have both this lens and the much more expensive 100mm L, and unless I printed VERY large, I doubt anyone could tell which I used. It's just a question of working distance. Outdoors, I usually use the 100mm because it is a little easier to get bugs, although I have done a lot of bugs with the 60mm too. Indoors, or with things that don't move, I usually end up reaching for the 60mm because I prefer the working distance, e.g., for closeups of flowers. The 60 is also a very nice portrait length on the crop sensor as well.

I think one of the other posters is right: macro sounds really appealing, but it is technically very tough, and I think a lot of people buy a lens and then get disappointed with what they can produce. However, if you know macro already, or are willing to take the time to learn, the 60mm will produce very good images.

paddler4 wrote in post #12772551
It is a superb lens. I have both this lens and the much more expensive 100mm L, and unless I printed VERY large, I doubt anyone could tell which I used. It's just a question of working distance. Outdoors, I usually use the 100mm because it is a little easier to get bugs, although I have done a lot of bugs with the 60mm too. Indoors, or with things that don't move, I usually end up reaching for the 60mm because I prefer the working distance, e.g., for closeups of flowers. The 60 is also a very nice portrait length on the crop sensor as well.

I think one of the other posters is right: macro sounds really appealing, but it is technically very tough, and I think a lot of people buy a lens and then get disappointed with what they can produce. However, if you know macro already, or are willing to take the time to learn, the 60mm will produce very good images.

Thanks for this reply and all the others. I am by no stretch of the imagination an incredibly accomplished macro photog but I have been tinkering with it quite a bit and have had some nice results with various set ups including zoom lenses/extention tubes/diopters (raynox). I have never owned an actual "macro" lens and think I would really enjoy the versitilaty of it with regards to not loosing the infinity focus like you do with the tubes and diopters. I just want to get the right FL. It would really be nice to go between my 30 and 85 mm's as a lens for normal stuff as well. Not to mention that if I pick up another 1.6x only lens it might finally be enough to get rid of the full frame itch for a good long while. According to the-digital-piture review the 60 has a 1:1 WD of 3.5" and the 100 has a 1:1 WD of 6". I may be able to live with this as not all my stuff needs that kind of magnification. Sorry for the typos...no spell check here.

i like the longer working distance of the sigma 150 f2.8

I thought I wanted to do macro until I spent some time in the macro forum here. I don't want to go that far with it. I'm not after photos so close to a bug that you can see its soul. I've also seen the complicated and potentially expensive rigs they have in order to get those shots.

However what I do like is closeup work. Photos that are very close and show great detail. For this, I've found the 60mm to be great. I have several photos with this lens on Flickr.

I also agree that it's a great portrait lens, though after come comments from my mom yesterday, I don't know if a razor-sharp lens is the best idea for portraits. Especially of women. Especially of older women.

Jason

Jason Paul wrote in post #12778912
I thought I wanted to do macro until I spent some time in the macro forum here. I don't want to go that far with it. I'm not after photos so close to a bug that you can see its soul. I've also seen the complicated and potentially expensive rigs they have in order to get those shots.

Jason

you dont have to get a complicated and expensive rigs to get those shots
look at this video and home made
its very simple and cheap
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=wqRn3at0H60
and the result is more better than the expensive macro lens
good luck

shedberg wrote in post #12771839
Well, thanks to all the positive posts in this thread combined with the sample gallery, I placed a bid on and won an EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro lens on eBay tonight! Can't wait to get it!

I did buy one a couple of days ago.

For macro I think it's great. Very sharp and really nice overall. Here is an example with my Kiss X4 (aka 550D). This is the main purpose for my macro, small musical instruments parts like this. This screw is about 1.9mm diameter x 2.8mm length. It's not even 1:1 magnification, I think it's approx 1:0.75 (it's not a 100% crop).

As a non-macro lens, I found it's very good for some things and not for others. It really depends what you want from it. I was walking with some friends in a crowded street festival and market and it was mostly too long and sometimes too wide, not often the right length. Not really possible to change lenses which is why I prefer a zoom for this. For a concert in a club it was great, though sometimes too long.
For low light that I need, I'll probably get a flash eventually which would be much bigger improvement, but don't want the hassle of that for now.

The f/2.8 is something I'm getting used to. It's faster than what I had, but not a huge difference in terms of low light, but it helps. For me IS helps a bit more, even if I shoot people. I'm not a good hand-holder. You can also get very shallow DOF which can be nice sometimes if you want it, I rarely do and usually need he longer DOF. I did surprise myself and get some decent photos even at 1/30-1/100 (only one with the former).

Anyway I'm very happy with it.

Edit: I added another at just almost 1:1 magnification, with slightly more cropping and reduced quality to allow uploading to the forum.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

this is a sample test on my 7D with the 60 ef-s

link to pic

it is really sharp