Posted by Jeff Wiebe on September 20, 2007 at 1:10 PM
Hey all. I'm looking at getting myself a dedicated macro lens. Nothing super high end, but something nice. I've read rave reviews of the Sigma 105mm macro and the new Sigma 70mm macro. Can anyone offer an opinion?
I'm using a Rebel XT right now, but am saving my pennies and hope to have a 40d around Christmas.
Posted by Bill Fach on September 20, 2007 at 1:33 PM
Jeff: DO NOT get a short focal length macro. 100mm is the bare bones minimum IMO and 180-200 is much better. The Sigma 150 and 180 lenses are very competent. Longer focal lengths give you more reach for bugs and butterflies and a narrower field of view that makes controlling the BG much easier. I started doing macro with a Minolta 100mm which is far and away the sharpest lens in my bag but once I got a 200 I hardly ever use the 100 for macro. Long is best by far. >=))>
Posted by Steve Foss on September 20, 2007 at 1:36 PM
Bill is spot on in general about focal length. I'll only add one qualifier. Because almost all of my macro work is on flowers/plants, not on insects, the longer focal length isn't very helpful for me. And in the thick woods where I work, long macros actually would sometimes require too much working distance. If my focus changed to bugs/butterflies, I'd save up for one of the long macros in a heartbeat. As it stands, the Canon 100mm macro I've got is just right.
Posted by Mike Moats on September 20, 2007 at 2:29 PM
Hey Jeff, I would agree to go with the longer focal length, but if monies a issue you could go for the 105mm and later add a 1.4 teleconverter if you need the extra focal length. You may lose a stop or two but just raise the ISO a bit to compensate. I shoot all my images with a Sigma 180mm macro and it works great. Longer focal length is less stain on my back, less bending over.
Posted by Dan Borzynski on September 20, 2007 at 3:00 PM
An additional comment from Mike's. I have seen, but not confirmed, that Canon's 105 mm macro is not compatible with their teleconverters due to the placement of the optics when you try to attach them.. Can anyone confirm this?
Beyond that, you have pretty much been given the advice I would.
As an insect/macro specialist, since you shoot Canon, one comment on the 65 mm 1x-5x macro lens. Do NOT buy this lens now. It is a great piece of equipment, but it is absolutely NOT a beginner's lens. This lens is far more specialized than a 600 mm lens and you'll also have to spring for a macro flash as well. Go for a 90-105 mm, or 180-200 mm, or the Sigma 150 (the last two focal lengths if budget allows), with teleconverters for going beyond 2x, first. When you are ready for this lens, both by experience and subjects, you'll know it and not have to ask.
Posted by Mike Moats on September 20, 2007 at 4:30 PM
I think Dan may be right that the 105mm will have problems with a teleconverter, I recall one of my workshop students telling me of a problem with that combination, better check it out at your local camera store before you make any purchase in that direction.
In my eyes, you really need to precise what you want to shoot at to benefit from all the information you will receive in the next days. I use the MP-E 65 mm as well as the 60 mm from Canon because I like to work only a few cm away from the subject. This means that it is very difficult to get a number of shy insects (i.e. butterflies) but, on the other hand, you can get unique shots of spiders and many beetles. Working so close of the subject forces you to think more about the angle, the background, the body parts you want to focus on. For dragonflies and butterflies, then I would go for the 180mm lens.
Hope this helps
Gregoire
PS: why would you get the 40D when you have the Xti? (actually I would like to do the same but did not find the real trigger that would make me run into the first photo shop... I'm still waiting for the devil's advocate)
As to using a teleconverter with the Canon 100mm, Dan's right, you can't directly attach a teleconverter to it although you can do it if you put an extension tube between the teleconverter and the lens. Obviously you lose your distance focus ability but in a macro setting it doesn't matter.
Posted by Buck Ward on September 20, 2007 at 8:45 PM
Although I now have a Canon 100, in a previous life I shot macro with a Micro-Nikkor 55mm. It is a wonderful lens. One gets used to the short working distance, especially if one hasn't experienced a longer focal length macro lens. If budget is an issue, the longer lenses cost more than the shorter ones.
If you have a good prime lens, a Canon 500D and/or extension tubes can give you good macro capability without breaking the bank.
Posted by Mark Kraus on September 20, 2007 at 10:00 PM
Short macros are lighter and sometimes can be hand held and cost a little less. Like many stated before, longer lens give you more working distance. That can be a big deal when working with insects and other subjects. Another plus many don't think about is that the longer lens give you a narrower field of view. This can be a great help when trying to eliminate some of those bad backgrounds. I had a Nikon 105 and it was a great lens. But after several years went with the Sigma 180 to get more working distance. Great lens.
MK
Posted by Kelly Rowe on September 21, 2007 at 9:41 AM
You may already have something in your kit that would serve you well for macro work. One of my instructors tipped me off about this. He does great macro work with a 70-200 L IS and a 2X TC. It gives him a 400 mm lense with a minimum focus distance of about 4 feet. It's perfect for bugs and shy butterflies. I've tried it several times and it works quite well. It won't work for the fly's eyes, but it will fill the frame with butterfly wings and frog faces.
Posted by Rajesh Mohan on September 21, 2007 at 3:45 PM
Dan Wrote:
"An additional comment from Mike's. I have seen, but not confirmed, that Canon's 105 mm macro is not compatible with their teleconverters due to the placement of the optics when you try to attach them.. Can anyone confirm this?"
Dan you are absolutely correct. You cannot connect a teleconvertor directly behind a Canon 100mm macro. But you can use an extension tube in between macro and teleconvertor. In that case the focal length is not multiplied but the magnification is. Canon 100 mm is 1:1. With a 12mm extension tube and a 1.4x the magnification is approx 1:1.5. with a 2x it is 1:2.
With that you definitely have to use a flash because the light loss is high and you will lose focusing ability. So you just have to use f22 and guess the sharpness through view finder. But it sure opens a new world....
I hope it helps.
Posted by Rajesh Mohan on September 21, 2007 at 3:54 PM
Dan Wrote:
"An additional comment from Mike's. I have seen, but not confirmed, that Canon's 105 mm macro is not compatible with their teleconverters due to the placement of the optics when you try to attach them.. Can anyone confirm this?"
Dan you are absolutely correct. You cannot connect a teleconvertor directly behind a Canon 100mm macro. But you can use an extension tube in between macro and teleconvertor. In that case the focal length is not multiplied but the magnification is. Canon 100 mm is 1:1. With a 12mm extension tube and a 1.4x the magnification is approx 1:1.5. with a 2x it is 1:2.
With that you definitely have to use a flash because the light loss is high and you will lose focusing ability. So you just have to use f22 and guess the sharpness through view finder. But it sure opens a new world....
Discussion
12 repliesI'm using a Rebel XT right now, but am saving my pennies and hope to have a 40d around Christmas.
Beyond that, you have pretty much been given the advice I would.
As an insect/macro specialist, since you shoot Canon, one comment on the 65 mm 1x-5x macro lens. Do NOT buy this lens now. It is a great piece of equipment, but it is absolutely NOT a beginner's lens. This lens is far more specialized than a 600 mm lens and you'll also have to spring for a macro flash as well. Go for a 90-105 mm, or 180-200 mm, or the Sigma 150 (the last two focal lengths if budget allows), with teleconverters for going beyond 2x, first. When you are ready for this lens, both by experience and subjects, you'll know it and not have to ask.
Hope this helps
Gregoire
PS: why would you get the 40D when you have the Xti? (actually I would like to do the same but did not find the real trigger that would make me run into the first photo shop... I'm still waiting for the devil's advocate)
If you have a good prime lens, a Canon 500D and/or extension tubes can give you good macro capability without breaking the bank.
MK
"An additional comment from Mike's. I have seen, but not confirmed, that Canon's 105 mm macro is not compatible with their teleconverters due to the placement of the optics when you try to attach them.. Can anyone confirm this?"
Dan you are absolutely correct. You cannot connect a teleconvertor directly behind a Canon 100mm macro. But you can use an extension tube in between macro and teleconvertor. In that case the focal length is not multiplied but the magnification is. Canon 100 mm is 1:1. With a 12mm extension tube and a 1.4x the magnification is approx 1:1.5. with a 2x it is 1:2.
With that you definitely have to use a flash because the light loss is high and you will lose focusing ability. So you just have to use f22 and guess the sharpness through view finder. But it sure opens a new world....
I hope it helps.
"An additional comment from Mike's. I have seen, but not confirmed, that Canon's 105 mm macro is not compatible with their teleconverters due to the placement of the optics when you try to attach them.. Can anyone confirm this?"
Dan you are absolutely correct. You cannot connect a teleconvertor directly behind a Canon 100mm macro. But you can use an extension tube in between macro and teleconvertor. In that case the focal length is not multiplied but the magnification is. Canon 100 mm is 1:1. With a 12mm extension tube and a 1.4x the magnification is approx 1:1.5. with a 2x it is 1:2.
With that you definitely have to use a flash because the light loss is high and you will lose focusing ability. So you just have to use f22 and guess the sharpness through view finder. But it sure opens a new world....
I hope it helps.