Choices choices...

Hi,

Having sold my 100mm L IS to raise some cash - what can I replace it with for longer range macro - such as butterflies, dragonflies etc?

My current lineup includes the Sigma 70-200 HSM II - which has a pretty close focusing distance - how would it preform with a AF confirming tube? (I would test but I'm between cameras)

If thats not a good idea what other options would you suggest?

I know the 100mm (non-L) is a real cracker for the price, but what about the other offerings from Sigma or Tamron? I would still want AF as I really am too slow currently at manual focusing and almost always handhold

No one?

I don't have much knowlege of these things but I have some tubes and a canon 75 -300, so I can see how well they do. It should give similar results (but not as good as the Sigma). If work allows I will check it out tonight.

Excellent thanks - I do wonder how it will compare against a true macro too.

For bigger subjects like butterflies and dragonflies, the 70-200 should suffice. Add in extension tube(s) if you want to achieve higher magnification.

Other cheaper alternatives to the 100L is Sigma 150. I have the non OS version and I love it.

Cheers, just scanning through your pages now.

Ok I tried a few shots with the 75-300 at 200mm with extension tubes.

The working distance from the end of the lens was 20 inches (it is odd working that far away from the subject) The frame is about 40mm so it is 1/2 the magnification of a true macro lens.

At 100mm the frame is about 33mm, so not too far off the 21 mm for a 1:1 macro lens. The working distance drops, but is still a good bit more than my other lenses.

Here is a sample image at 100mm:

I could imagine this being a good setup for butterflies and the like.

The 300/4 IS makes a wonderful butterfly/dragon lens with it's impressive MFD and high magnification ratio.

Bob

Excellent - thanks guys