Which Macro lens?

[Colin RedGriff]

I am thinking about buying a dedicated macro lens. Up to now I've used extension tubes with various of my lens' for macro work which I've had different levels of success with.

I think I want something around 100mm so I can try macro insects and I will be able to work a bit further away. I'm also going to do a portrait photography class over the winter and they are often quoted as being good for portrait work. I want a good quality lens that will last several years of use.

It will be used on my Canon 50D but I want a full frame lens as I am also thinking about getting a full frame body at some point.

Choices seem to be between the following

Sigma 105mm f2.8 APO Macro EX DG OS HSM

Canon EF 100mm f2.8L Macro IS USM Lens


Canon EF 100mm f2.8 USM Macro Lens

Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro Lens

Tokina 100mm f2.8 AT-X Macro Lens

The first two seem to be about £300 more than the others, do people think they are worth the extra money? Is the image stabilisation worth the extra money for doing handheld macro work??

I've got both Sigma EX DG and Canon L lens' and like both of those so I am leaning towards those. I've not had any experience with Tokina but seems to get good reviews.

Any experience with any of these lens' welcomed.

Thanks

[Simpo Two]

Colin RedGriff said:

Is the image stabilisation worth the extra money for doing handheld macro work?

It could be. The higher the magnification the more of an issue camera movement becomes, and if you're at small aperture (for useable DOF) your shutter speed can easily fall into the danger zone. A tripod is another answer of course but you don't always have one handy.

[14-7]

If you go for a 100mm L series macro then you are spending £7-£800 on it.

If you are just starting out I would recommend the normal 100mm or even the 60mm and a dedicated ring flash (Marumi do one at around £100) which will help you a lot more than IS will.

Don't discount the 60mm lens if you want to save a little bit of money. It's a corker of a lens and it's what I use although I do want a 100mm for that extra working distance and the fact if I go FF it will fit that as well.

A few examples. (the first is with a macro flash, the rest without)


Fly 28-08-11c by 14-7, on Flickr


Damselfly (front) by 14-7, on Flickr


Fly 16-05-10d by 14-7, on Flickr


Rose by 14-7, on Flickr

[dibbly dobbler]

I'm using the Canon EF 100mm f2.8 non-IS - lovely lovely lens

You'd be better off with a decent flash rather than forking out on IS imho

I got both of these with it (the macro shot was with a marumi ringflash) :


Hoverfly (1) by dibbly dobbler, on Flickr


Forth Road Bridge Sunset by dibbly dobbler, on Flickr

[RobDickinson]

The canon 100mm is the best non macro lens (i.e. for portraits etc) as it has the best non macro focusing.

Also the USM ones will activate the 7D's high sampling rate for autofocus (and I assume later canon bodies will have this).

The 60mm ef-s macro is crop only but one of the sharpest lenses around.

I havnt seen any reviews of the sigma 105mm f2.8 OS yet, is it actually out now?

Sigmas 70mmf2.8 is superb, full frame, gets no press, and is the sharpest lens a few websites have ever tested.

Also the 150mmf2.8 sigma macro is superb, and has a handy tripod collar which many use to mount flashes on. Theres a new OS version of this too.

I have a Tamron 90mmf2.8 Di, its good, sharp, but has flaws, a bit of CA and not the best bokeh for a macro, for the price I paid (£130 or so , used) it was a bargain.

[McMacro]

The mpe-65 is out of the question, unless you are interested in photographing the tips of people's noses (at best)

I agree about the 100mm non-is. I've never though "wish I had IS" when using it. Lighting is crucial with any macro lenses, regardless of IS. I use the mt-24ex, the advantage of that is it'll work on the mp-65 (once you decide you want to get closer).

[andy-xr]

Tamron 90mm not get a look in? I bought mine for portraits, you have to be a bit careful though as it's sharp as owt

Portrait (large size) http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6133/6029363520_e21...
Quasi-macro (large size) http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6026/5980832633_3bd...

[Gemm]

I love my Canon 100mm f2.8 macro (non-IS). As mentioned, the use of flash would probably be more valuable than IS (though I haven't tried this IS lens before, I can imagine it). It's also a great portrait lens, which I often choose it over my 70-200mm IS.

[Colin RedGriff]

Simpo Two said:

It could be. The higher the magnification the more of an issue camera movement becomes, and if you're at small aperture (for useable DOF) your shutter speed can easily fall into the danger zone. A tripod is another answer of course but you don't always have one handy.

That was my thought but this seems like sensible advice too....

14-7 said:

If you go for a 100mm L series macro then you are spending £7-£800 on it.
If you are just starting out I would recommend the normal 100mm or even the 60mm and a dedicated ring flash (Marumi do one at around £100) which will help you a lot more than IS will.

dibbly dobbler said:

I'm using the Canon EF 100mm f2.8 non-IS - lovely lovely lens

You'd be better off with a decent flash rather than forking out on IS imho

RobDickinson said:

The canon 100mm is the best non macro lens (i.e. for portraits etc) as it has the best non macro focusing.

Also the USM ones will activate the 7D's high sampling rate for autofocus (and I assume later canon bodies will have this).

I havnt seen any reviews of the sigma 105mm f2.8 OS yet, is it actually out now?

Sigmas 70mmf2.8 is superb, full frame, gets no press, and is the sharpest lens a few websites have ever tested.

Also the 150mmf2.8 sigma macro is superb, and has a handy tripod collar which many use to mount flashes on. Theres a new OS version of this too.

I have a Tamron 90mmf2.8 Di, its good, sharp, but has flaws, a bit of CA and not the best bokeh for a macro, for the price I paid (£130 or so , used) it was a bargain.

Sigma 105mm is up on Warehouse express; but no I've not seen any reviews of that particular model, it's predecessors have been very well received so I'm hoping the quality will be the same.

andy-xr said:

Tamron 90mm not get a look in? I bought mine for portraits, you have to be a bit careful though as it's sharp as owt

Must have missed that one thanks, choices choices......

I think that my money is better spent on a non-IS lens and get a decent ring flash..........

I've read reviews that changing to manual focus on the Sigma 105 is clumsy, anyone on here that can comment?

I think the Canon EF 100mm is my preferred option. Now about that ringflash.......

I've looked at these in the past but their seems to to be a whole range of variations on this from things that attach to a hotshoe flash and use fibreoptics to the loads-a-money Canon and it got so confusing. What are the things to look for in a good ring flash? Obviously it has to fit on the end of the lens but are there other considerations?

I'll check out that Marumi one if any one has any ideas on other ring flashes please let me know

[Gemm]

Another good thing about the Canon is it doesn't extend with focusing, while some of the rest do. EDIT: and also full-time manual focusing, which is absolutely essential for macro!

As for the ring flash, Canon one can trigger off additional flash, so the lighting can be more creative. But remember the lighting created by a ring flash can be flat (even although you can adjust the ratio of right and left flash), so personally I often don't like the effect on flowers, but it's perfect on insects.

[Colin RedGriff]

Thanks for the thought on the ringflash.

I've got a couple of flashes and wireless triggers so maybe I'll play with those a bit more and research ringflash a bit more.

[Simpo Two]

Ringflash would certainly avoid the need for IS - the only downside that all your shots will be lit the same. But certainly a worthy option and the above examples look very good.

[dibbly dobbler]

Colin RedGriff said:

Thanks for the thought on the ringflash.

I've got a couple of flashes and wireless triggers so maybe I'll play with those a bit more and research ringflash a bit more.

I've a Marumi ringflash and it definitely works and is cheap but of late I've been reading up on what other macro togs use and it seems a regular flash with a cheapo pop up diffuser is a good option - you get a lovely soft light and some of the shots produced this way are fab. So if you've already got a good standard flash I would see how it goes with a diffuser (should not cost much - see eBay), that may be all you need