1. michael23

    michael23

    Messages:
    13,975
    Name:
    Michael
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I shall certainly be giving the m50 a good look at the photography show next week.

    On the thought of primes, a dedicated efm 85 would be nice.

    What are peoples thoughts on the 28mm 3.5 macro?
     
  2. dave_bass5

    dave_bass5

    Messages:
    2,405
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don’t do much macro, but when I do its with my 24-70 f/4 and always at the 70mm end, So a short macro wouldn’t be my first choice of focal length.
     
  3. michael23

    michael23

    Messages:
    13,975
    Name:
    Michael
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I have a sigma 105, as much as I like results from it, I just don't seem to enjoy using it, I find it far to heavy, wished I had saved my money and not brought it. So it may go in part ex.
     
  4. Mike.P

    Mike.P

    Messages:
    4,028
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I enjoy doing macro and have various dedicated lenses of different focal lengths ranging from the Pentax 35mm to the Sigma 180mm. The 35mm gets used very rarely as the working distance is too restrictive for bugs, it is more useful for flowers etc and 180mm is perfect for butterfly etc. Around 100mm is a happy medium and I would happily buy a small lightweight version with built in ringlight should Canon make one for the M.
     
  5. the black fox

    the black fox

    Messages:
    5,929
    Name:
    Jeff
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I had the 180 a few years ago mike and it’s really a excellent focal length but far to heavy and unwieldy for hand holding , the 150 mm I have now feels about right and with added o.s should hopefully be a keeper once stuff is about again
     
  6. Mike.P

    Mike.P

    Messages:
    4,028
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Have to say I don't have a problem hand holding the 180mm.

    I seem to remember not so long ago you saying you were fine hand holding the 150-600mm sport which is a lot heavier. ?
     
  7. dave_bass5

    dave_bass5

    Messages:
    2,405
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    A long (100mm+) macro lens is a lens I’ve often wanted, but I’ve never got around to getting one as I don’t really buy lenses just for one thing, and I know I wouldn’t use a 100mm lens much for other things. That’s why I love my 24-70. It gives me macro when I want it, while still given get me a good general zoom. Not sure its a good lens for crop cameras though. Ive used it a few times on my 80D but it seems awkward.
     
  8. GeeJay57

    GeeJay57

    Messages:
    1,787
    Name:
    Glenn
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I have an EF 100mm f/2.8L, but haven't used it on the M. Must give it a go.
     
  9. Mike.P

    Mike.P

    Messages:
    4,028
    Edit My Images:
    No
  10. huffy

    huffy

    Messages:
    2,091
    Name:
    Mark
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Not sure if this has been mentioned before but it may be another prime lens to add to the list.

    http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-m-32mm-f-1-4-announcement-coming-for-photokina-cr2-cr3/
     
  11. the black fox

    the black fox

    Messages:
    5,929
    Name:
    Jeff
    Edit My Images:
    No
    yes I do mike but in that case its a matter of balance with a 1d3 on the back ,with a 180 macro coupled with a eos.m I would think it was front heavy
     
  12. Phil V

    Phil V

    Messages:
    21,458
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    We can only live in hope, this would leave me 2/3 on the way to a sensible sized M kit, the 85 with the adaptor isn’t that incongruous.
    If it’s a 1.4 it’ll probably necessitate me selling a lens, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, I have too much gear.
     
  13. Hugh Jarse

    Hugh Jarse

    Messages:
    5,053
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Such a lens release with quality performance would be an instant replacement for my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 ART! Another prime without gimmicks (LED lights) a bonus.
     
    Phil V likes this.
  14. Hugh Jarse

    Hugh Jarse

    Messages:
    5,053
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    It is a compromise lens. Not particularly sharp, has the LED lights which do a bit of work in Macro but the d.o.f is very shallow. I got it for recording my stamp collection. Rarely gets used these days and, for prime in that range, I use a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 AaRT which will be moved on IF Canon release s decent fast 32mm M mount prime as mentioned earlier in the thread.
     
  15. dave_bass5

    dave_bass5

    Messages:
    2,405
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Canon 24-70 f/4 IS. This lens has all but replaced my 24-70 f/2.8 mkii as my general shooting lens.
     
  16. tourerjim

    tourerjim

    Messages:
    219
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Oh' why would that be, the M5 M6 effectively same camera.
     
  17. michael23

    michael23

    Messages:
    13,975
    Name:
    Michael
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I had always wanted one, as I couldn't afford the 180 or 150 macros. I also wanted a portrait lens as well, so settled on it. I find it to awkward a focal length on apsc. Strange as I really enjoyed using a 75mm 1.8 on an olympus em1 (150mm equivalent).

    Thanks, it was a general wondering, trying to decide which way to put my money.
     
  18. Mike.P

    Mike.P

    Messages:
    4,028
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Just had a look, macro mode of 0.7x magnification is good for a zoom lens, not quite 1:1 but enough for most purposes. May have to invest in one as it would make a decent walk around lens in that case.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2018
  19. dave_bass5

    dave_bass5

    Messages:
    2,405
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    This is the lens i keep almost buying. In fact I also nearly swapped my 135L for one a while ago, but i just dont think ill do as much macro as i hoped..
     
    GeeJay57 likes this.
  20. RedRobin

    RedRobin

    Messages:
    4,019
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ....That's the lens I use on my M5 for insects and sometimes also with the x1.4 Kenko (the Canon Extender doesn't physically fit), so @140mm as an option.

    Some examples on Flickr : https://www.flickr.com/photos/114775606@N07/albums/72157683996949495/with/34852591351/

    I also have recently bought a Canon 24-70mm F/4L which has a 'Macro' switch but bought it for general photography. This year's insect season hasn't really started yet.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2018
    GeeJay57 likes this.
  21. dave_bass5

    dave_bass5

    Messages:
    2,405
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ive not owned a macro lens before, and didn’t know how much I’d use it so couldn’t justify a dedicated macro lens. At the same time i was wondering if i could scale down my 24-70 f/2.8 mkii a bit, as its quite big and heavy compared to some of my other lenses. The f/4 just seemed to fit all the criteria. I find IQ to be more than good enough, macro mode is fun to use (although i know there is much better out there) and its smaller and lighter than my f/2.8 Plus, having IS means i can shoot down to about 1/5 hand held, so I’m getting lower ISO settings than I would when shooting static scenes with my f/2.8. Being able to get just that bit closer, without actualy going macro is very useful for me.
    It’s funny but when thislens was released I really couldnt figure out why Canon did this, it seemed to sit in the same area as the 24-105 and 24-70 f/2.8, so to me seemed pointless. Funny how opinions change.
    I still wouldnt use it much on a M or crop camera, its hardly been on my 80D since i got it, but i will definitely try it when i grey my M50.
     
  22. Hugh Jarse

    Hugh Jarse

    Messages:
    5,053
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Handling - pure and simple

    I use the 22mm on the M6 90% of the tine and the 11-22 otherwise. At this time, for me, the 22, 11-22 and 55-200 are the best of the M lenses.
     
  23. tourerjim

    tourerjim

    Messages:
    219
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Aww ok im with ya now, that's why i cant bring meself to sell my eos M & M3 as i now stick with the 22mm on the M & 10-20mm on the M3, M6 I use with all my other lenses.
     
  24. niko

    niko

    Messages:
    1,865
    Name:
    nik
    Edit My Images:
    No
    out off interest why don't you like the 24-79 f4 on your crop camera?
     
  25. dave_bass5

    dave_bass5

    Messages:
    2,405
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Well its not as wide as my 18-135, nor as long. Ive never felt really comfortable with a lens starting at 24mm on a crop camera. Obviously the IQ is great, but it seems like its just sitting in the middle of the range, and losing out at each end.
    I really only use my 80D (or any crop) as travelling light/holiday camera, so in those circumstances i want as light as possible, and with little need to swap lenses.
     
    niko likes this.
  26. niko

    niko

    Messages:
    1,865
    Name:
    nik
    Edit My Images:
    No
    thank you mate
     
  27. Phil V

    Phil V

    Messages:
    21,458
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The 24-70 zoom is (personal view) a bloody horrible zoom length on a crop camera, the wide end isn’t really wide, the long end is nearly long enough for a medium tele.
     
  28. niko

    niko

    Messages:
    1,865
    Name:
    nik
    Edit My Images:
    No
    i must admit i take more shots at the tele end of a 24-70 than the wide so a start at a "sort of 35mm at the wide end" isnt really an issue for me. it seems i am in the minority- mind you nothing new there:p:D
     
  29. Phil V

    Phil V

    Messages:
    21,458
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Loads of people use a 24-70on crop, including my Mrs for years, i found it terrible though.

    And I wouldn’t put one anywhere near my M5, a huge lens of the wrong length on a lovely little camera.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2018
  30. dave_bass5

    dave_bass5

    Messages:
    2,405
    Name:
    Dave
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I’m much more a tele end guy, my walk around lens on my 5D4 is normally my 70-300L. Saying that i just find 24mm a bit too cramped on a crop. I never really got on with the 24-105 on my crops for the same reason.

    Agree, although the 24-70f/4 is quite a bit smaller and lighter than the f/2.8 verisons.
     
  31. niko

    niko

    Messages:
    1,865
    Name:
    nik
    Edit My Images:
    No
    agree on the m5/6 the little primes would fit much better, mind you i havent seen one in the flesh yet, keep meaning to take a trip out to play with one
     
  32. michael23

    michael23

    Messages:
    13,975
    Name:
    Michael
    Edit My Images:
    No
  33. tourerjim

    tourerjim

    Messages:
    219
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Wonder if they will bring out a M60 with VF option like the M6 followed on from the release of M5.
     
  34. the black fox

    the black fox

    Messages:
    5,929
    Name:
    Jeff
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Got my 55-250 is STM Lens tonight to go on the M3 .hope to test it tomorrow but first impressions are good and under ninety quid with hood and filter.

    Best thing is I bought it from the son of a dear friend who passed away in January ,and he is now selling off all dads stuff ,we let it go through e.bay to ensure he got the best price . So I now have a lasting memento of a dear departed friend
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2018
    Hugh Jarse, wardy07 and Phil V like this.
  35. Hugh Jarse

    Hugh Jarse

    Messages:
    5,053
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    If my experience is anything to go by, you will enjoy it. Just one of those ‘wonder’ lenses.... ie “Wonder why I took as long to get one”?
     
    the black fox likes this.
  36. Steve B

    Steve B

    Messages:
    831
    Name:
    Steve Bennett
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Phil V likes this.
  37. Hugh Jarse

    Hugh Jarse

    Messages:
    5,053
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Agreed, hopefully Canon will drop gimmicks and go for top IQ, no built in LEDs and Cappuccino dispenser....

    I am speculating a £300-375 UK price.
     
  38. magicolor1

    magicolor1

    Messages:
    1,024
    Name:
    Simon
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'm not bothered by built-in LEDs, but a Cappuccino dispenser *would* actually be useful... :D
     
    jerry12953, Mike.P and Phil V like this.
  39. Hugh Jarse

    Hugh Jarse

    Messages:
    5,053
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  40. Steve B

    Steve B

    Messages:
    831
    Name:
    Steve Bennett
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Cant see them using f1.4 for a macro lens, seems a bit pointless?
    I suspect they will need too large a front element to be able to fit LED lights, but who knows until official details are released?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice