Canon EF 100mm F2.8 Macro USM

[AuSL]

I new to DSLR photography and I'm trying to take some photos of the fishes I kept for reference.

Can anyone comment on the len above and what is the price range for a second set without warranty.

Thanks

 

[mpenza]

~$750 for one without hood?

 

[benny]

I use it to take pictures of my killifishes.

Excellent lens! Don't settle for less.

But if you want to fill the frame without cropping the original file, perhaps the Canon EF 180mm F3.5 L Macro USM?

Cheers,

 

[AuSL]

Thanks to mpenza and benny for the info.

I'm hunting the lens for my 300D.

Benny,

The price of a Canon EF 180mm F3.5 L Macro USM is way too expensive... :embrass: for me. It'll be a waste for me to just use it to take my fishes.....

 

[benny]

By the way, I've read somewhere that the Tamron Macro is suppose to perform better than Canon. It's cheaper too. And Tomcat uses the Sigma Macro for his aquatic photography. Great results. Perhaps you can consider these 2 alternatives.

Cheers,

 

[justarius]

I use it to take pictures of my killifishes.

Excellent lens! Don't settle for less.

But if you want to fill the frame without cropping the original file, perhaps the Canon EF 180mm F3.5 L Macro USM?

Cheers,

if you are at 1:1 one, the only difference the 180mm is going to make from the 100mm is the distance you are away from the object. nothing to do with whether one has more frame filling capability or not. No need to get the 180mm if you are not going outside to stalk dragonflies.

 

[AuSL]

Here is the comparision of the 2 lens. Canon 100mm Macro USM vs Tamron 90mm Macro

Do anyone have a idea what's the price for a new Tamron 90mm Marco lens?

Someone is offering me the Canon 100mm USM lens for $650 and the Canon 100mm without USM at $450.

I'm at a lost now :dunno:

Any suggestion?

 

[megaweb]

By the way, I've read somewhere that the Tamron Macro is suppose to perform better than Canon.

You may correct in term of image quality but not AF ...

 

[benny]

You may correct in term of image quality but not AF ...

True. I remember reading about the image quality. As for AF, I've almost never used it in shooting fishes. AF is just not fast enough for them in a fish tank.

Cheers,

 

[benny]

if you are at 1:1 one, the only difference the 180mm is going to make from the 100mm is the distance you are away from the object. nothing to do with whether one has more frame filling capability or not. No need to get the 180mm if you are not going outside to stalk dragonflies.

hmm, I have both the 100 mm macro and the 180 mm macro from Canon. When the subject is smaller, I just switch over to the 180mm for more reach. I need about 20 to 30 cm away from the subject in order not to spook them. So when all things being equal, doesn't the 180 mm fill the frame much better than the 100 mm?

Anyway, I don't shoot dragonflies. The 180mm is exclusively used indoors for my fishes at the moment. At least until I find some kaki to go shooting with.

Cheers,

 

[AuSL]

I'm trying to find a lens that is easy to use and affordable for me to take even fish eggs which is around 1mm in size. :embrass:

This picture is taken by my 300D with the kit lens plus a +4 filter.

 

[justarius]

hmm, I have both the 100 mm macro and the 180 mm macro from Canon. When the subject is smaller, I just switch over to the 180mm for more reach. I need about 20 to 30 cm away from the subject in order not to spook them. So when all things being equal, doesn't the 180 mm fill the frame much better than the 100 mm?

Anyway, I don't shoot dragonflies. The 180mm is exclusively used indoors for my fishes at the moment. At least until I find some kaki to go shooting with.

Cheers,

sighz, as I said earlier, the 180mm has more working distance, thus you can be further away to be at 1:1. The 100mm has less working distance, thus you have to be closer to be at 1:1. But at 1:1, the frame filling capability of both lenses is exactly the same. I have to agree with you however, that at the same subject distance, the 180mm can have a greater magnification than the 100mm.

 

[benny]

I'm trying to find a lens that is easy to use and affordable for me to take even fish eggs which is around 1mm in size. :embrass:

Fish eggs don't move around. The EF 100mm Macro should be great for it, especially if you have close up filters.

Cheers,

 

[juilian75]

hi ,

what is USM?

I am a newbie too

Am looking for a macro lens too...will the tamrom be suficent
what does the 90mm and 105 mm means?
whats the dif.


when i was using the cp5000 my lens can be as close as 10 cm away from the fish i'll just follow and wait till it stops and shoot.

sometimes it takes me a few days or not at all to get a good shot.

With the D70 18 -70mm lens i am not able to get a big shot of the fish....
can you advice on what lens to get for the D70 for shooting the fish close up without flash...

its not the perfect shot ..buts sufficent for now

appreciate some help on this Benny

 

[justarius]

USM= ultrasonic motor. This is Canon lens technology, and most of the discussion already here is on Canon lens, which wouldn't be compatible with your Nikon D70. The equivalent Nikon technology is called AF-S, or Silent wave motor. Sigma also has their own version of this technology, except that its called HSM or Hypersonic Motor.

90mm, 105mm are examples of focal length. I suggest a good beginner's camera guide to get the most out of your camera, and to understand the terms like aperture, shutterspeed etc better. Check out ziploc's guide:
here

 

[benny]

what is USM?

USM is the Ultra Sonic Motor used by Canon's Auto Focus system. It's quieter and faster than similar lenses without the USM designation.

Am looking for a macro lens too...will the tamrom be suficent
what does the 90mm and 105 mm means?
whats the dif.

As long as you are happy with it, I suppose any brand will do. Some members here swear by Canon/Nikon etc etc while others here will tell you that third party makes (like Sigma, Tokina, Tamron) is just as good. Do bear in mind that third party makes are usually cheaper alternatives too (and hence scoffed by some with deeper pockets).

As for 90 mm and 105mm, it's just focal length. 105 mm will have a slightly longer reach compared to 90mm. On a Canon 300D, this will translated to 144mm and 168mm respectively due to the 1.6X magnification. To be honest, the difference between 90, 100 and 105 mm is marginal.

when i was using the cp5000 my lens can be as close as 10 cm away from the fish i'll just follow and wait till it stops and shoot.

sometimes it takes me a few days or not at all to get a good shot.

With the D70 18 -70mm lens i am not able to get a big shot of the fish....
can you advice on what lens to get for the D70 for shooting the fish close up without flash...

With a 90 or 105 mm macro lens, you can definitely get closer and get a larger picture of your fishes than your existing lens. But in order to get a sharp picture, you will probably need to shoot at 1/125 sec. With ambient tank lighting, your aperture may be too small and as a result, the Depth of Field will be too shallow. This is usually resolved by additional aquarium lights or using flash. Try not to use any aperture value lower that F5.6. Otherwise, a large part of your fish may be out of focus.

Hope that helps. Here's a couple of pictures taken with the 100mm macro lens.

Cheers,

 

[AuSL]

Benny,

Your pictures are simply wonderful. Any chance I could pick up some skills from you? ;p

 

[simonsng]

AuSL, hope this comparison chart helps

If you see the comparison below, you can clearly see the differences in quality... but in terms of built.. Canon has it all including faster AF. I dunno about you, but i find manual focusing is faster when doing macro

pic taken from http://iapf.physik.tu-berlin.de/jbohs/HKO/TUBerlin/dforum/macro/Macro100.html

here is the english version
http://www.orchideen-kartierung.de/Macro100E.html

First comparison

Second comparison

can't do hotlink....

 

[mpenza]

The poorer edge definition wide open might have been related to the slightly shallower depth of field of the Canon lens (Canon is 100mm vs Tamron's 90mm).

 

[benny]

Benny,

Your pictures are simply wonderful. Any chance I could pick up some skills from you? ;p

Compared to the guys here, my picture's nothing.

But I'm more than happy to shoot some fishes with you and compare notes.

Cheers,