macro option - canon 100mm 2.8 or Tamron 180

[fastgear]

Hi folks

I would like to find out if I should fork out additional $$ to pay for a Tamron 180mm Macro for my 20D. Or should I settle for a Tamron 90mm or a Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro.

Is the additional length going to be a problem for handheld?

Someone mentioned about 3rd party lenses like Schneider for Macro. Any comments?

Thanks.

[20D]

If you like to take handheld shots, get 100mm. If you're going to shoot insects and serious about macro, get 180mm with tripod.

[Lenscapes]

how about checking on the Tokina 100 2.8 Pro D macro too?
http://www.thkphoto.com/products/tokina/afl-m100-a.html

[Goldenstars08]

I suggest Tamron 180mm Macro...because after shortly I got the Tamron 90mm Macro I need to change to 180mm Macro for the extra distance...180mm Macro good to mount on tripod, use without flash the colour look more natural...

For a +-100mm Macro you need to hand held to get close...at close distance little light can enter = slow shuttle speed you also need flash to light up your subject...that mean the colour will not be as natural...

[sonix]

I would say 180 is a better working distance. I just sold my 100mm, still looking for 180mm slowly.

Unlike proconsumer camera where you can look at the LCD, hence you are not so close to the insects (assuming u like taking insects).

I find macro is easier using proconsumer camera although some migh disagree.

Look at megaweb post, he still using canon A-series

[fastgear]

Thanks for the feedback.

How about 3rd party ( non Canon ) lens like Schneider. Do they have good macro?
Or do they cost more than an arm and a leg?

Thanks.

[mpenza]

those might be mounted like filters.

anyway, a lot depends on what you want to shoot. if you shoot insects, Tamrom 90mm is not very suitable, not only because of the close working distance, but also because the protruding of the lens during focussing could scare off creatures.

for macros, specialised macro light or off-mounted external flash could help you create good lighting.

[holeinone]

Try the sigma 150mm... it's pretty new in the market. Silent operation, sharp and front does not protrude when focusing...

[BobCheong]

If you have a 70-200mm somewhere, you might want to consider using it with an extension tube, save alot of money.

Here is a shot taken with a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 with a 25mm extension tube

[DT_]

go for the furthest focal as possible...

[hwchoy]

suggest you try to borrow the lenses you have in mind and try them in your most common shooting settings. while longer focal length is good, they are also heavier and need to shoot at higher speeds with hand held. depending on your needs, monopod/tripod may or may not be feasible. so you have to find the right compromises.

[Spiridon]

wah uncle choy, didn't know you are here as well agree with you. 100mm may just be good enough.

[hwchoy]

Originally Posted by Spiridon wah uncle choy, didn't know you are here as well agree with you. 100mm may just be good enough.

eh you are who ah? any how shout uncle like that make me feel so old

[simonsng]

in the end of the day, it is still dependent on the type of macro you intend to shoot, insect always good to have longer focusing distance. for fish (which is for UNCLE choy) 100mm is enough, but if you ask Benny, he hardly use his 100mm :P, now is 180mm L

[lightning]

yeah, I think macro shots takes a certain degree of skills as well. 2 photographer at the same location with exactly same equipment will produce very different result. Having better working distance means heavier lens and trypod is needed. How many people can carry this kind of equipment whole day?

Cheers

[benny]

I believe that each of the different focal length (for macro lenses) is made for certain specific subject in mind. As such, to ask which of the focal length is more suitable without specifying for what type of subject would not really be meaningful.

Cheers,

[lightning]

Originally Posted by benny I believe that each of the different focal length (for macro lenses) is made for certain specific subject in mind. As such, to ask which of the focal length is more suitable without specifying for what type of subject would not really be meaningful. Cheers,

Totally agree... there are 60mm Macro Lens from canon that is super!

[ray_stinger]

The Canon 100mm f/2.8 is one of the best compromise between working distance and weight. Im sure you wont want to lug around a heavy lens + tripod all the time trying to shoot insects.

[sriram]

Serious macro work and nothing else with the lens : 180mm
Macro work and general purpose / portrait lens : Canon 100/2.8 USM, which doubles as a fantastic portrait lens with fast focusing.
Studio work, controlled situation : Canon 50mm compact macro and extension tube.

I love my canon 100/2.8 USM and would not exchange it for anything else, not even an "L" macro. It is absolutely the sharpest, best corrected and distortion free lens I have ever used, including L lenses, and the only lens which is blazing sharp even wide open at f/2.8.

[benny]

Originally Posted by sriram Serious macro work and nothing else with the lens : 180mm Macro work and general purpose / portrait lens : Canon 100/2.8 USM, which doubles as a fantastic portrait lens with fast focusing. Studio work, controlled situation : Canon 50mm compact macro and extension tube. I love my canon 100/2.8 USM and would not exchange it for anything else, not even an "L" macro. It is absolutely the sharpest, best corrected and distortion free lens I have ever used, including L lenses, and the only lens which is blazing sharp even wide open at f/2.8.

For me, it's more of the subject size...

For less than 1 cm - MP-E 65 mm macrophoto lens
For 1 to 3 cm - 180 mm macro
For 3 to 15 cm - 100 mm macro
For 15 cm and above - 50 mm macro.

Cheers,