Lens for canon 200D?

Messages
15
Edit My Images
No
Hi, i just wanted to ask what are the best macro lenses for canon 200D?

And what telephoto would be best, mostly for wildlife photography?

Thanks
 
Messages
24,894
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
From macro I suppose the first thing is to decide what focal length you're happiest with. For macro, just getting a smallish subject or detail to fill more of the frame and for other uses such as portraits I like the perspective a longer lens gives and of the few macro lenses I've owned the Sigma 150mm f2.8 has been my favourite. On the other hand a 50mm macro could be useful as a walk about lens.

Anyway, for a macro lens I'd look at something in the 90-150mm range... unless the idea of a 50mm excites you more :D
 

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
12,123
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
Macro lenses: Pretty much all macro lenses deliver very good image quality. That's one dimension you don't have to worry about.

Most "proper" macro lenses will give you 1:1 magnification. That means that, when the lens is focused at its minimum focus distance (MFD), you can fill the frame with a subject which is the same size as the camera's sensor - in your case that's about 22.3 x 14.9 mm. Of course you can achieve a lower magnification, if you want, by not focusing in so close. But don't get fooled by consumer zoom lenses that have the word 'Macro' painted on them. They'll tend to deliver slightly higher magnification than 'ordinary' lenses, but maybe only 1:3 or so.

The main difference between macro lenses is that, while they will all give you 1:1 magnification, the MFD at which they do that varies with the focal length. In very round numbers, a 60mm macro would have a MFD of about 20cm, a 100mm macro would have a MFD of about 30cm, and a 150mm macro would have a MFD of about 45cm. But bear in mind that that's measured from the sensor, not the front of the lens. The distance from the front of the lens to the subject at MFD is called the working distance, and it's going to be around 10 cm / 15cm / 25cm for 60mm / 100mm / 150mm macro lenses. The working distance can be very important when it comes to getting light onto your subject, and also if you want to avoid sharing ofd skittish insects.

So which to buy? Personally I think "short" macro lenses, whilst cheap, can be too difficult to use. I think something in the 100mm range is very usable and you're spoilt for choice: the Tamron 90mm, Canon 100mm (two versions) and Sigma 105mm are all very good. I think the Canon 100mm "L" series is probably the best, but the Sigma probably offers the best value for money. But you can't go too far wrong with any of these.

Wildlife lenses: Depends very much on what kind of wildlife you have in mind. More information required.
 
Last edited:
Messages
24,894
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Just for info the reviews says that the Sigma 150mm MFD was tested as 374mm, Siggy apparently state 380mm.

PS.
If the macro involves bugs or anything else that might get frightened and crawl or fly away a longer lens might be better as it'll get you and the gear further away.
 
Messages
1,173
Name
T
Edit My Images
Yes
TBH, any EF mount macro or telephoto lens will work on the 200D

Are you looking to buy New or Used ! ?
 
Messages
4,993
Edit My Images
Yes
The Canon 100mm f2.8 macro is a superb macro lens, possibly one of the best available, and if coupled with a set of Auto extension tubes would give you an excellent setup.

But I have also got excellent results with a set of Kenko auto extension tubes and a Canon 50mm f1.8 lens.

And I got very good results using two sets of extension tubes on the same lens.
 
Messages
454
Edit My Images
No
Sigma 105mm f2.8 os macro is a real bargain, and as good as the canon, I can also vouch for the sigma 150mm f2.8 os macro, my current macro lens, and can be picked up for a similar price to the canon...
 
OP
K
Messages
15
Edit My Images
No
The Canon 100mm f2.8 macro is a superb macro lens, possibly one of the best available, and if coupled with a set of Auto extension tubes would give you an excellent setup.

But I have also got excellent results with a set of Kenko auto extension tubes and a Canon 50mm f1.8 lens.

And I got very good results using two sets of extension tubes on the same lens.
Thank you for answer, I just wanted ask does image stabilization is very important? I check the first lens that you have mention and it is without the stabilization. Although it is much cheaper than the version with it. Will i have to use tripoid for every kind of photos for example landacapes? Or will i have to use only for macro?
 
Messages
454
Edit My Images
No
Image stabilisation isn't necessary all the time, and that applies to all scenarios, not just macro...by definition it helps in low light by allowing a slightly lower shutter speed. It can also be counter productive in some shots. I often use flash with macro, which freezes the action and negates the need for os. I don't use the os on my sigma 150 when I use flash, as I'm usually shooting a moving insect and the extra second that the os needs to stabilise, can miss the shot, so don't worry about whether a lens has os or not, if you don't have it, you won't miss it. A monopod also helps with macro, if a tripod is out of the question.
 
OP
K
Messages
15
Edit My Images
No
Image stabilisation isn't necessary all the time, and that applies to all scenarios, not just macro...by definition it helps in low light by allowing a slightly lower shutter speed. It can also be counter productive in some shots. I often use flash with macro, which freezes the action and negates the need for os. I don't use the os on my sigma 150 when I use flash, as I'm usually shooting a moving insect and the extra second that the os needs to stabilise, can miss the shot, so don't worry about whether a lens has os or not, if you don't have it, you won't miss it. A monopod also helps with macro, if a tripod is out of the question.
Thank you very much, that helped me a lot as i know which one to buy now :)
 
Messages
454
Edit My Images
No
Missed the landscape part....tripods are essential for long exposures, if you're using a filter for or want a large dof, for example...or it's a dull dark day... but if you're taking a photo of a bright sunny vista, and you are able to have a fast shutter speed, you can handhold
 
Messages
2,115
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Forums>Classified>For Sale>Canon or Forums>Classified>Wanted
 
Messages
2,052
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
Are the classifieds available to someone with 14 posts? Is it not 25 posts to gain access? <<< happy to be proven wrong :)

Anyway, I can only vouch for the EF100/2.8 & also the EF-S60/2.8 from way back in my Canon DSLR days. Both great lenses.
 
OP
K
Messages
15
Edit My Images
No
Image stabilisation isn't necessary all the time, and that applies to all scenarios, not just macro...by definition it helps in low light by allowing a slightly lower shutter speed. It can also be counter productive in some shots. I often use flash with macro, which freezes the action and negates the need for os. I don't use the os on my sigma 150 when I use flash, as I'm usually shooting a moving insect and the extra second that the os needs to stabilise, can miss the shot, so don't worry about whether a lens has os or not, if you don't have it, you won't miss it. A monopod also helps with macro, if a tripod is out of the question.
I wanted to ask aswell is it better to buy Canon EF 100mm F/2.8 or Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro for canon without stabilisation or a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 DC Macro OS which is with stabilisation? Is it better to buy longer lens without stabilisation?
 
Messages
1,173
Name
T
Edit My Images
Yes
I wanted to ask aswell is it better to buy Canon EF 100mm F/2.8 or Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro for canon without stabilisation or a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 DC Macro OS which is with stabilisation? Is it better to buy longer lens without stabilisation?

Well the Canon EF 100mm F2.8 is full frame lens, so you will get 60% magnification over a EF-S lens sensor camera I think the Sigma 105mm f2.8 is also for full frame camera lens so again a 60% magnification is gained ie making this lens on a 200D 168mm !

I own the EF 100mm f2.8 Marco lens and get good results as it is almost as good as Canon's L version IMO. I have a pringal tube flash hack for macro ( Speedlite is 508EX Mkii ) work and that works fine. I could just buy a expensive flash ring, however I do not do enough macro to warrant the spend.
So the question about stabilisation, well depends on if you are going to be in low light alot or just up the shutter speed & ISO a little and introduce a falsh.

This is going to be a case of trail and error. Is it possible to borrow a lens and have a play for a few days ! ?
 

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
12,123
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
Is it better to buy ... a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 DC Macro OS which is with stabilisation?
... don't get fooled by consumer zoom lenses that have the word 'Macro' painted on them. They'll tend to deliver slightly higher magnification than 'ordinary' lenses, but maybe only 1:3 or so.
The Sigma 17-70mm is a decent lens but it' s consumer zoom, not really a macro. It has a maximum magnification of 1:2.8.
 
Messages
454
Edit My Images
No
For the money, you can't go wrong with the canon 100 f2.8 or for similar money the sigma 105 f2.8 os
 
Top