Should i save 300+ more to get canon 100mm macro rather then a tamron 90mm .


Aug 23, 2010
45
0
0
#1
hi guys i am considering getting macro , i am interested in macro thus i am thinking whether i should spend more money in it , and yes i am a beginner.
 

ManWearPants

Senior Member
Jul 14, 2008
4,200
6
38
Singapore
#3
depends how steady your hands are. I would think the IS is useful for pple like me who have shaky hands. Also the 100L has weather sealing, so if the diff is $300, I would go for the 100L, if I am going to hike and shoot insects. But if you are going to be shooting product shots, it does not matter.
 

Last edited:
Aug 23, 2010
45
0
0
#4
depends how steady your hands are. I would think the IS is useful for pple like me who have shaky hands. Also the 100L has weather sealing, so if the diff is $300, I would go for the 100L, if I am going to hike and shoot insects. But if you are going to be shooting product shots, it does not matter.
its not the is one :( is one is too expensive for me
 

Aug 23, 2010
45
0
0
#5
depends how steady your hands are. I would think the IS is useful for pple like me who have shaky hands. Also the 100L has weather sealing, so if the diff is $300, I would go for the 100L, if I am going to hike and shoot insects. But if you are going to be shooting product shots, it does not matter.
if you have the money, why not?
actually i dont have the money , if i get the 100mm means i will take a longer time to get it cause i am saving up from my allowance :(
 

Sep 17, 2008
3,656
0
0
#6
why not consider cheaper alternative such as raynox?
 

wdEvA

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2006
6,284
0
36
etanphotography.com
#11
the canon 100mm usm macro is a better choice if you shoot insects, as the lens does not extend as you focus, therefore you won't scare the insects away while focusing.

The Tamron 90 is a great lens as well! depending on your budget, either lens will get you great images.
 

Jan 28, 2010
646
0
0
Ha Noi, Vietnam, Vietnam
#12
Are you sure you need 1:1 magnification? I shoot things that require higher level of magnification than normal lenses, but not true macro magnification, so I find extensive tubes useful and much cheaper (plus I can use my 50mm lens to shoot, which imo produces nicer images than cheaper macro lenses)

If you must have true macro, and must decide between the Canon and the Tamron, do you know the all the differences between the two? Then it's easier to decide if $300 justifies it. But my general advise is to go as far as your budget can stretch
 

ManWearPants

Senior Member
Jul 14, 2008
4,200
6
38
Singapore
#13
ok man thanks man , i think i have decided to get tamron wish me luck on that one!
no need to wish you luck. There is nothing wrong with Tamron lenses. A lens in hand is better than 2 on the shelf. Just do it. I think Sigma also have good macro lenses.
 

juste_millieu

Senior Member
Mar 17, 2004
1,615
0
0
#15
if the difference is $300, go for 100L
if u need the lens urgent, go for tamron
if u can wait, go for 100L
if u seldom shoot macro, go for tamron
:D
 

Aug 23, 2010
45
0
0
#16
if the difference is $300, go for 100L
if u need the lens urgent, go for tamron
if u can wait, go for 100L
if u seldom shoot macro, go for tamron
:D
no need to wish you luck. There is nothing wrong with Tamron lenses. A lens in hand is better than 2 on the shelf. Just do it. I think Sigma also have good macro lenses.
Hey all u sexy people , thanks alot! its not a 100L its just the 100mm one. and thanks for the sample it looks quite awesome! is there any portrait field test u did with it? and thanks man wear pants , i wear pants too and yes! nth is wrong with tamron lens i am just afraid cause this would be the first lens i am buying :) in my entire life . i am excited!
 

NovJoe

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2009
5,650
0
0
~Sunny Little Island~
#17
The tamron SP90 Di Macro Lens is a very good piece of glass that produces sharp images. Only thing I don't like is the extension of the lens when focusing towards 1:1.
 

Top Bottom