Which Macro lens to choose?

[justleesa]

I am thinking of getting a macro lens for my 5D. Canon offers the 500mm, 100mm and the 180mm. What other lenses are out there and what would be a good choice? and what makes it a good choice?

 

[msmendel]

The 100mm Canon USM f 2.8 macro is your clear choice for uw macro with the 5D. You want your lens to be fast, so it can focus more easily. This lense is faster than the 180 mm. It has a closer working distance than the 180 mm, and for UW photography, you want to get close to your subject to eliminate backscatter. It is more than 2.5 inches shorter than the 180mm, and it will fit behind a standard port. I'm not sure Ikelite even makes a port for the 180 mm macro. Both the 100 mm and the 180mm magnify up to lifesize and focus to infinity. Canon's 50 mm (sic 500 mm) macro focuses up to 1/2 life size and lacks the USM feature which provides faster, quieter focusing. The 50mm is not as good a lens IMO.

 

[justleesa]

oppps...I stuttered :blush:...it's the 50mm

Thanks for your insight

what do you think of Sigmas MACRO 70mm F2.8 EX DG? I only have canon lenses, but I know people that use other manufacturers lenses and are pretty happy with them...

 

[Jamdiver]

Are you planning to use this lens exclusively for topside or underwater usage Leesa??

Either way, the Canon 100mm macro wins by a mile.
On land it's stellar and underwater it's one of the preferred macro lens...... just ask Alcina .

In the meanwhile you could check out some of the pics taken with the lens topside on this forum.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=158427

Btw, if you had a 1.6x crop camera like a 20D/30D or 350D/400D, I would mention the 60mm macro lens.
But that won't work on your camera.

 

[justleesa]

As I haven't housed it yet (I know, I'm a chicken), I'm thinking for topside stuff.

I would mention the 60mm macro lens.

That's why I was thinking of the 70mm...if it was any good and worth taking into consideration (as far as usage goes)

Thanks for the link! interesting views.

Now I'm going to have to ask a blond question (wouldn't be me if I didn';t ), because they mention that the use the 100mm for portraits. I have a 50mm 1.4...that is something totally, totally different than a macro 50mm right?

 

[Jamdiver]

As I haven't housed it yet (I know, I'm a chicken), I'm thinking for topside stuff.



That's why I was thinking of the 70mm...if it was any good and worth taking into consideration (as far as usage goes)

Thanks for the link! interesting views.

I'm not quite familiar with the Sigma macro lens, but i'm sure that it delivers great results too.
The 100mm probably is better for macro as it has a narrow field of view I think.
Really and truly both of these proably deliver excellent images.
If you have the chance you could always try them each individually at a local camera store to help in your decision.

Now I'm going to have to ask a blond question (wouldn't be me if I didn';t ), because they mention that the use the 100mm for portraits. I have a 50mm 1.4...that is something totally, totally different than a macro 50mm right?

Yup totally different, the 50 f/1.4, can't deliver the 1:1 lifesize magnification or focus anywhere near as closely as what you'd want for a macro Lens such as the 100mm f/2.8 !

 

[justleesa]

I'll have to see if Ritz has it...my LPS doesn't and the other one we had closed about a year ago....Internet and the death of LPS's

 

[RonFrank]

I'll have to see if Ritz has it...my LPS doesn't and the other one we had closed about a year ago....Internet and the death of LPS's

Macro lenses, by any manufacture rate out as some of the best lenses made. IOW's a Sigma macro is going to out perform 90% of Canons or Nikons other lenses, and will be about the best lenses that each manufacture makes.

You need a Full Frame lens, so you can rule out any Digital crop lenses made by anyone.

If you already have a 50mm lens, than I'd go with something in a different focal length.

You have not said what you intend to shoot? Keep in mind that most of the topside world does NOT define Macro as head shots or closeups. The true definition of Macro is a lens that is capable of creating a life sized image ON the film plane (1:1 ratio). MICRO is defined as greater than life sized, and is generally achieved via extension tubes or additional magnifying glass.

Recently marketing hype has worked on revising this definition to mean shooting something that will appear life sized on a 4x6 print. That is about 1:4.

In the UW world people tend to define macro as anything that is shot with a macro lens! Another definition is NOT a wide angle shot!

K, enough terminology. I'd also go with a 100mm lens. However if you are considering shooting stuff like BUGS or SNAKES, or stuff that you may not want to get REAL close to, a 180mm is a lovely choice. Realize that many people here may not know that your 100mm lens nets you 100mm, not 150mm! That 105mm that someone says is so great is really closer to a 180mm than it is to 100mm.

I personally don't think it's an either/or choice! Get them both!

But if you are looking to fill out your lenses, you may want to consider what lenses you already have in the ranges you are looking to add. If you love shooting butterflies, a longer lens is going to be better. If you want to shoot worms or slugs than a 100mm lens is fine as you can get closer without the subject bolting! A 100mm is a very good all around macro choice, but again, depends on what you intend to shoot!

 

[justleesa]

Thanks for the input Ron! Good stuff

what I have:

50mm F/1.4
24-70mm f/2.8L
75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II (from hubby's collection)


For the future (near/distant - all depends on my wallet) I am looking for a WAL, a bigger zoom and a macro.

What I want of the lens:

Tele-zoom - I really like the L-series and would like it to have IS. Just to get closer in and get some good surfer shots from shore...to get closer with the lens when the option of getting closer myself isn't possible.

WAL - I don't mind taking panoramas to get a wider view, but sometimes the stiching isn't smooth because my subject is moving.....a nice WAL so that if I ever get over my fear I can use UW as well.

Macro - Fill the frame is good - fill it even more is even more bettah (but then again with almost 13mp cropping isn't a problem)...I take pictures of flowers...objects....something with a narrow to midrange dof....again, if I ever house my camera....that I can use it UW.

 

[RonFrank]

Thanks for the input Ron! Good stuff

what I have:

50mm F/1.4
24-70mm f/2.8L
75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II (from hubby's collection)


For the future (near/distant - all depends on my wallet) I am looking for a WAL, a bigger zoom and a macro.

What I want of the lens:

Tele-zoom - I really like the L-series and would like it to have IS. Just to get closer in and get some good surfer shots from shore...to get closer with the lens when the option of getting closer myself isn't possible.

WAL - I don't mind taking panoramas to get a wider view, but sometimes the stiching isn't smooth because my subject is moving.....a nice WAL so that if I ever get over my fear I can use UW as well.

Macro - Fill the frame is good - fill it even more is even more bettah (but then again with almost 13mp cropping isn't a problem)...I take pictures of flowers...objects....something with a narrow to midrange dof....again, if I ever house my camera....that I can use it UW.

For Macro as you don't have any macro lenses, I'd likely go with the more traditional 100mm.

For WA, something in a 17/18~35mm is NICE on a full frame camera. Keep in mind that edge distortion and light falloff are going to be more pronounced using FF, so a higher end lens ($$$) will make a difference.

I'd look for a 70~200mm F2.8 IS (I know, expensive). It's about my favorite lens for topside shooting in the Nikon flavor, but my 18~200VR has become my most used lens as it's just so darn handy to carry around.

I'd consider adding a body that DOES do a 1:6 multiplier to push that 200mm into a 300mm range, or your 300mm into a 450mm. There are some advantages to the multiplier effect even if you can crop your images.