Macro lens

SpikeK6

SpikeK6

Messages
3,546
Name
Spike
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi I am looking to buy another couple of len's i will be looking at the canon 10-22mm for lovely wide stuff but a bit stuck on the macro side of things.

With zooms they more or less speak for themselves but a fixed mm macro is slightly different
What focal lenght is ideal and any other features i should be looking for.
Been dabbling with my kit lens and liked what i could do so want a true macro lens now, to get some much better close up shots like seen in the macro section on here.

All help and comments appreciated.
Oh and both will be 2nd hand too,
Budget is not too much of an issue for the 2 lens but aint got £1000's to spend :lol:


thanks

spike
 
Spike

I find the best macro focal length is round 100mm, such as the Canon 100mm or Sigma 105mm. These give a comfortable working distance from camera to subject to allow a bit more light in. With 50mm focal lengths, even on a crop sensor, you will find that you have to get very close to the subject. This is true whether you are shooting insects or non-living things. I use a 180mm, but then I use it exclusively for insects in the field.
 
The table below show the MWD (the distance from the end of the lens to subject) for various macro lens - if your shooting bugs and things the bigger the MWD the better.

focusdistance.jpg
 
Thanks guys

So its looking like the 100mm is the one for me, just aswell I stuck this thread up was looking at 60mm and was getting confused.

Thanks again

spike
 
I have the sigma 50mm and the canon 100mm. They are both f2.8, both tack sharp but the main thing I prefer about the 100mm is you are further from the subject at 1:1. More of an issue with stuff you may scare away but equally with the 50mm and a ringflash you can't use 1:1 as you are too close for the flash to be effective.

Thinking laterally, if you are after a nice focal length portrait lens and don't have a nifty then the 50mm sigma is a good un!
 
I've tried three macro lenses. The canon 60mm, the Sigma 105 and the Tamron 90mm. They are all SUPER !! sharp. The Sigma and the tamron will give you a longer working distance to the subject but the Canon has USM and Internal Focusing which is useful if you are photographing easy to scare bugs.

Now I have the Tamron doubling as a macro and portrait lens.
 
The Tamron 90 quote by Dogfish WON'T accept the Sigma 1.4 TC (post 4). I have both. I suspect it won't accept any as the internal connection size is slightly different at the camera end of the lens

Realspeed
 
SpikeK6 said:
Thanks guys

So its looking like the 100mm is the one for me, just aswell I stuck this thread up was looking at 60mm and was getting confused.

Thanks again

spike
Click to expand...

I have the 60mm find it great, ever for insects, might not be the best for flies etc or anything that scares easily....but even with a longer ranger macro your still close enough to scare them.

I like the 60mm as it makes a good portrait/general walk about/general purpose too.

I hear really good things about the tamron 90mm, think its slightly sharper too.
 
SpikeK6 said:
Thanks guys

So its looking like the 100mm is the one for me, just aswell I stuck this thread up was looking at 60mm and was getting confused.

Thanks again

spike
Click to expand...

For a crop sensor 100mm is excellent, and Canon one is worth the extra cost. That is more or less the only reason I am keeping 40D. On FF, however 100mm is too short, I just don't like it any more, it makes me want 150mm / 180mm macro. Therefore, I doubt 60mm for crop would be a good start, unless you are mainly into product photography where 'it doesn't matter much'.
 
these taken with 60mm, second one with full set of kenko reducing the working distance again.

I personally don't think my 60mm is too short, I think for flies longer might be better. But even then the super lens of the mp-e65 is a 65mm and people get 5:1 of insects with it.

Personal preference I suppose, my 60mm gives me best of both worlds with macro and 'general' use

ladylove-1.jpg


test-8.jpg
 
Robbo said:
I personally don't think my 60mm is too short, I think for flies longer might be better. But even then the super lens of the mp-e65 is a 65mm and people get 5:1 of insects with it.
Click to expand...

Let's make this clear now. There is a very good technical reason why 5:1 is easiest to achieve with an inverted macro 65mm MPE. I am not going to go deeper into the details, but basically this would be much harder at 180mm.

For alive and free to fly butterflies, dragonflies and other beasts short macro is simply a no go. Longer lenses also give nicer bokeh for floral photography.

50mm f/1.4 is for general stuff.
 
Yes I know but the working distance of the mpe65 is what I am on about, not the ratio.

For them insects you mentioned I agree a 180 would be much more suited. But for everything else I think 60-100 would get it. I haven't found any thing I have shot has been to close for my 60mm.

Like I say probably personal preferences
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top