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

idsurfer wrote in post #12765621
I have been to the lens archive. I see many people that were posting no longer have this lens in their signature. Is this one of those that people think might be nice to have but after trying it find out it isn't what they had hoped for? It would fit in great with my extensive line up of 2 lenses. I also really like to shot close-up stuff. I would love a lens with this capability yet could be used for regular work as well. I hate not having infinity focus with extension tubes and close up filters. Is this thing sharp enough at the wider apertures? I don't see tons of people owning this one.

I sold it simply because because I added a FF body and wanted the option to use macro on both bodies with ease. In the back of my mind I figured a little extra working distance might not hurt for bugs either, but if I had stuck with APS-C I would have stayed with the 60 until the 100L arrived.

I think the 60 is actually slightly better optically than the 100 non-L USM, if anything.

I have both the 60mm and the 100L. Both are VERY sharp. I find the 100 best for bugs, the 60 is nice for flowers. I like the greater working distance of the 100 for bugs, not as likely to scare the critters away or rile them up so they sting or bite. The 60 seems to have a greater depth of field and it is easier to get the flower shots that I want. Also, it takes a LOT to scare off a flower and they rarely bite... Image wise, they are quite comparable. The 60 is a very nice lens. I sometimes use it as my 'low light prime'.

I have the 60mm and the Sigma 150mm. I use the 150 for most of my macro's and the 60 for portrait stuff.

And its the missus's favorite macrolens. So i cant sell it without serious repercussions.

Got mine in the mail today... holy cow I love this lens!