What Macro Lens to Get?

For portrait and Weddings?

Or what Macro lens 100mm and up do you prefer?

BTW, I just want to do tighter headshoot with more visible details ...

I have the 85L II and 135L and Im thinking about getting the 70-200 IS either 4 or 2.8

For portraits the Canon's autofocus is faster than any third party. Optically they are all about the same with Tamron's being sharpest followed by sigma, followed by Canon. (90 mm, 105 mm, 100 mm)

For macro? I really like my EF 100 mm 2.8. You might already have fallen for Ls though, so perhaps the 100 mm 2.8 L? There are threads about this on macrotalk.

The autofocus on Sigma would annoy me to capture those special moments, ok for portrait and subject is likely to move.

IQ is good, am not sure how much faster the focus is on the Canon thought, hopefully someone will have some advice on that first hand.

Either the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro or the Canon 100mm f2.8 IS L. I found a great deal on a new non-L so that is what I bought. Optics are going to be about the same, you just need to decide if you want to spend the extra for the red ring and the IS.

plasticmotif wrote in post #8919741
For portraits the Canon's autofocus is faster than any third party. Optically they are all about the same with Tamron's being sharpest followed by sigma, followed by Canon. (90 mm, 105 mm, 100 mm)

Not sure how you reached that conclusion. Judging on the APS-C scope on a 8MP camera at Photozone the Canon and Tamron are neck and neck, too close to call. The Sigma is pretty identifiable as the "worst". However, in this case even the worst is pretty damn good.

As for higher res sensors only the 100mm F2.8L was tested on that camera so no comparisons can be made. However, it did very well with hitting into the excellent range on that sensor as well.

jrscls wrote in post #8919837
Either the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro or the Canon 100mm f2.8 IS L. I found a great deal on a new non-L so that is what I bought. Optics are going to be about the same, you just need to decide if you want to spend the extra for the red ring and the IS.

And included hood and better build quality/sealing.

LethalFrog wrote in post #8919834
The autofocus on Sigma would annoy me to capture those special moments, ok for portrait and subject is likely to move.

IQ is good, am not sure how much faster the focus is on the Canon thought, hopefully someone will have some advice on that first hand.

The AF on the 105 is useless. The 150 is however in a totally different league. Good AF speed, internal focusing and nice focal length for fullframe.

Talking about sharpness and these lenses is nonesense :P They are all sharp enough. And maybe a little too sharp for portrait..

plasticmotif wrote in post #8919741
For portraits the Canon's autofocus is faster than any third party. Optically they are all about the same with Tamron's being sharpest followed by sigma, followed by Canon. (90 mm, 105 mm, 100 mm)

I take it your talking about the Sigma 105mm and not the Sigma 150mm ?
The Sigma 150's Af is very fast for a macro and it is a very sharp lens.

The 135L isn't giving you sharp headshots?

xarqi wrote in post #8920379
The 135L isn't giving you sharp headshots?

I never stated anything about sharpness .. please re-read my question ...

If I want to get a crazy IRIS shot or some detail makeup the 135L can't get close enough neither is that detail hence the question ..

If I was to go with a Macro which one and if not and I go with another lens which one .. 70-200 or 200? Or should I just buy tubes and use the 135L ... I'm trying to weight all my options ..

RiKaN HaVoK wrote in post #8921133
I never stated anything about sharpness .. please re-read my question ...

Pass.

xarqi wrote in post #8921264
Pass.

good for you .. next time read before you ask then ..

if not for your request for 100mm or longer, I'd definitely recommend the Tamron 60mm f/2. I got a chance to try it out and have to say, its brilliant.

RiKaN HaVoK wrote in post #8921346
good for you .. next time read before you ask then ..

reread your own question, dipstick.

visible details = sharpness

Anyway. Why get a macro, get the 100 f/2