Which Macro lens length for APS-C camera?
- Thread starter TerryH
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,013
- Name
- Phill
- Edit My Images
- No
Depending on the subject of the macro and your other lenses id say 60mm as itl also make a perfect portrait lens
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Personally I'd go for a 100mm - the working distance (distance from the lens element to subject) is just to small on a 60mm (approx 90mm) where as the 100mm will give around 150mm.
- Messages
- 6,584
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
200mm.
My answer for macro is; the furthest you can afford
My answer for macro is; the furthest you can afford
- Messages
- 3,194
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
Depends on what you want to use it for. For shy things like bugs and stuff then the longer the better, for close up work then almost any length is fine. The shorter the focal length the
I think you may be a tad confused here. The working length of a macro lens will remain the same on a crop camera or on full frame. The field of view changes for sure, but not the working distance.
- Messages
- 1,338
- Edit My Images
- Yes
He was just quoting minimum working distances for the Canon 60 and 100mm macros, not implying that the MWD varies according to sensor size.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100mm-f-2.8-USM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is spot on.
An additional consideration is whether you'd get any other use out of the lens. As some have pointed out here, macro lenses in the range of 60mm can usefully double up as portrait lenses on crop-sensor bodies.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,809
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 9,818
- Edit My Images
- No
+1
For some subjects, e.g. aquarium photography, the working distance can be critical to the results you want to achieve. Too short might put the camera in the tank, too long and you find yourself needing to be in the next room on the wrong side of a wall (the latter is more of problem with pseudo-macro zooms).
Without knowing your intended subject, it's just guesswork.
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think your behaving like my wife..............
She also reads things into conversations that have never been stated , I think you'll find the only person mentioning sensor formats is you ?
- Messages
- 2,629
- Name
- Glenn
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The title of the thread perhaps.....?
To the OP, also worth considering that the closer you get to the subject, getting light into the space between the lens and subject becomes more of an issue. So a ring-flash can be a useful tool. I haven't played with extension tubes for a long while, but they can be an inexpensive first step into macro and will perhaps help you to decide what your preference is..
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,116
- Name
- And
- Edit My Images
- No
As Paul says, depends on what you want to shoot - my daughter doesn't shoot bugs and things, so we opted for the Sigma 50mm macro lens, well built and relatively cheap and works a treat for us, also doubles up as a 50mm prime lens as well...
Thanks everyone, truth is I am not sure yet what the subject will be. I like the idea of Macro photography but do not have a lens. I have mobility issues and this type of photography will be more available than say landscape. I have a prime canon 50mm 1.8 which I know is cheap but could use for portrait. I am considering the purchasing the Sigma 105mm Macro or should I go for the canon 100mm?
DG Phototraining
Woof
- Messages
- 5,064
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
50-60mm is too short for head & shoulder portraits, 100mm+ is far nicer and more flattering
Longer focal length macros mean your 'bug' is less likely to fly off as you shoot from further away, and its also far easier to add additional lighting without your own lens casting shadows
So yes, of the two you initially suggested then the 100mm is a 'better' focal length for most things
So to whether to buy the Canon or Sigma - I'd start off by reading various test reviews of both and unless there's a huge difference in quality I'd then buy the cheaper one - and probably a used copy too. Macro lenses are rarely abused like some others can be and of the 3 I've owned over the years only one I bought new, the others were (are) fine and 1/2 the price
The world of macro is fun as you don't need to travel much, you can set-up your own lighting at any time of the day and you get to see common things in a whole new way
Check out the technique of 'Focus stacking' too, there's even good free software to help if you don't have Photoshop
Dave
Longer focal length macros mean your 'bug' is less likely to fly off as you shoot from further away, and its also far easier to add additional lighting without your own lens casting shadows
So yes, of the two you initially suggested then the 100mm is a 'better' focal length for most things
So to whether to buy the Canon or Sigma - I'd start off by reading various test reviews of both and unless there's a huge difference in quality I'd then buy the cheaper one - and probably a used copy too. Macro lenses are rarely abused like some others can be and of the 3 I've owned over the years only one I bought new, the others were (are) fine and 1/2 the price
The world of macro is fun as you don't need to travel much, you can set-up your own lighting at any time of the day and you get to see common things in a whole new way
Check out the technique of 'Focus stacking' too, there's even good free software to help if you don't have Photoshop
Dave
Longer macro lenses give you more working space with skittish subjects like insects, and keep you a bit further away from things that can bite and sting too. It's less important for inanimate subjects, providing you can light them well.
you also need to consider whether or not the lens extends when focusing. I had the Tamron 90mm which did extend..Still a cracking lens.
I now have the Nikon 105mm but took a good look at the Sigma 105mm, which a friend has, and it's a fantastic lens.
I now have the Nikon 105mm but took a good look at the Sigma 105mm, which a friend has, and it's a fantastic lens.
- Messages
- 613
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
One thing to be aware of if buying used - the newer (current) version of the Sigma 105mm (EX DG Macro OS HSM) does not extend during focusing, which is a big bonus. It has also come down in price since launch and is good value (£375 new, less for a used one obviously). I have the 70mm Sigma Macro which is excellent, but if you have any thoughts of doing bugs and other live insects then the 105mm Sigma would be better than the 70mm Sigma or a 60mm.
You may want to think about lighting too - an off camera flash with a diffuser (even a home made one) triggered via the pop up works well but then you have to hold the camera in one hand and the flash in the other (unless using a tripod) which can be tricky, especially as macro lenses can be quite big and heavy. A proper ringflash can be quite pricey whereas you may already have a speedlight for your Canon?
You may want to think about lighting too - an off camera flash with a diffuser (even a home made one) triggered via the pop up works well but then you have to hold the camera in one hand and the flash in the other (unless using a tripod) which can be tricky, especially as macro lenses can be quite big and heavy. A proper ringflash can be quite pricey whereas you may already have a speedlight for your Canon?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,914
- Name
- Stuart or just Stoo!
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've got a 100 f2.8L macro that I used with a 5D3 a lot, then I got a 70D last August and I tried the 100 on that. Now I shoot macro with the 70D 90% of the time, it's AF system is fast enough to handle most subjects on AI Servo and the IQ is amazing with it. The L macro was, along with a 100-400 L, was the first L lenses I got and it still amazes me each time I shoot with it, the detail it resolves is superb. The 100 non L is reputedly the equal to the L in optical ability but about half the price. I've since bought an MP-E65 and sold it and I've also sold the 100-400 L but the 100 L is still in my box and staying put.
GardenersHelper
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,344
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That is very interesting to me as I'm thinking about a 70D with 100 f2.8L and MPE-65. I would be coming to the 70D and top line macro lenses "from the other direction" - bridge and micro-four thirds with achromats, so your comments about preferring the 70D to the 5D3 for macros are particularly interesting to me. I have been wondering whether to wait and see if Canon produces a full frame camera with an articulated screen and live view focusing like the 70D, but (apart from the fact it will quite probably not happen anyway!) from what you say it might be the wrong move in any case. Any insight you can provide on this would be very welcome.
I wonder if I could trouble you with some specific questions.
May I ask what the issue was with the MPE-65?
Am I reading it right that AF works well for macros with the 100 f2.8L? (I know AF won't work with the MPE-65, but I'd just have to live with that. Other things being equal, I prefer AF for macros, and I'd certainly want to use it with the 100 f2.8L.)
I'm interested in using the new live view focusing on the 70D with the 100 f2.8L - have you tried that?
Have you used the LCD for any macros? (The articulated screen, along with its apparently good live view implementation, is a major attraction for me, given where I'm coming from - using live view on articulated screens - for the odd angles on subjects that I often use.)
Do you happen to know whether I could use the LCD live view for manual focusing with the MPE-65?
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 45,716
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
When I was looking for a Macro lens some years ago, I had a play with both the 90mm Tamron and 105mm Sigma - both gave very good results. It was simply a matter of which turned up on a local 2nd hand shelf first - the Tamron won! Now use a Nikkor 105 but that's useless (for the OP but very, very good for me!!!) Took around 18 months for either to turn up on a local shelf so took patience.
- Messages
- 3,914
- Name
- Stuart or just Stoo!
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi Nick, some interesting questions there and I'll answer them in order.
1, I got the MP-E65 in October 2011 and it was going to be my Christmas present. Unfortunately I had an accident in between which has limited my range of movement and I can't manage to get down into the positions needed to take best advantage of it. The times I managed to use it indoors I got some fantastic shots with it, but sadly it didn't get enough use for me to keep it. It's a super lens though, but you do need a good lighting setup to take advantage of it.
2, the AF of the 70D is fast enough for me to keep up with 90% of moving subjects using AI Servo and as I usually shoot between f11 and f16 I get the subject in focus most of the time. For static subjects I usually use AF and then tweak in manual using Live view and a tripod, but most of my shots are insects and are usually moving.
3, yes I have tried using Live view focussing with the 70D, not very often compared to non Live view shooting, and I've been quite successful with it. It really helps on those hard to reach shots above the head or above a bush or something.
4, the articulated lens is a godsend with macro, I got a great shot of a butterfly about 18" above head height that I would never of managed otherwise. It's also been a great help in concerts to shoot above the heads of the crowds etc. It's one of the best features of the 70D IMO.
5, unfortunately I sold my MP-E65 way before I got the 70D but I really can't see why it shouldn't be able to be used in the right circumstances.
Hope this helps you make your mind up, although looking at your location there really might not be too much in the way of a subject if the recent weather doesn't improve soon. I hope you're managing to keep dry and best of luck.
GardenersHelper
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,344
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks very much. That is all very helpful.
I'm sorry to hear about your accident limiting your activities. It is oddly relevant to my thinking about this potential purchase. I'm 65 now and very conscious that time is ticking away until ... whatever comes next and I no longer have the privilege of having sufficient time and health to sink into the close-up work I am so involved in at the moment. Going down the route of 70D + 100 f2.8L + MPE-65 will be hugely expensive, and that is holding me back - can I really justify spending that much on a hobby? On the other hand, I do have the chance now of seeing what it is like to use top of the range equipment, and with the 70D the chance to use equipment that will let me work the way I feel comfortable with (well, for shots up to 1:1 anyway), and if I don't do it soon it may be too late. Basically, I'm dithering, but what you have said here makes it seem all the more tempting.
As to light for the MPE-65, I'm thinking that if I do this I'll go the whole hog and get an MT-24EX (and probably add DIY diffusion to it).
As to the weather, thanks for your concern. We are north of the Mendips and it is ok here, unlike for the poor folk on the Levels. I was out in the garden today. I couldn't do any photography because there was gardening to be done, but I did notice a couple of invertebrates without really looking too hard, and some flowers are starting to appear. (In fact we've had some rather pretty hellebores in flower for a couple of weeks now.) Of course, given the strange weather so far and whatever comes next (frost to burn off loads of the buds that are coming out now? - I do hope not), what sort of season we'll have for invertebrates and flowers is anybody's guess. Fingers crossed.
- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just to amplify this bit - there's nothing stopping you using an MP-E 65mm on any EOS DSLR. I use one quite happily(*) with my 40D. With a crop-sensor DSLR you fill the frame with a smaller subject than with full-frame camera, of course - at 5x magnification it's roughly 4.5*3mm instead of 7*5mm - but that's the only difference.
(*) I say 'quite happily' but of course that doesn't mean it's easy! I'm in awe of people who can use this lens well.
GardenersHelper
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,344
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks for the clarification. Hopefully several years experience with achromats (including the Raynox MSN-202) will help give me a fighting chance of getting some useful results from the MPE-65. (I'll be in trouble with the finance manager aka wife otherwise!
)
LongLensPhotography
Th..th..that's all folks!
- Messages
- 17,655
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
always buy the longest macro lens you can afford. IS can be an important consideration too. 100mm L / Sigma 105 OS are probably the best value
- Messages
- 5,335
- Name
- matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you have to buy new and you want Canon then the price difference between 60 Ef-S and the 100L macro is a lot, I have a non L 100 which I prefer on my crop body to the 60mm, spanner in the works time, 85 1.8 and extension tubes is a nice setup.