Which macro lens?

Associate
Joined
15 Nov 2002
Posts
829
Location
Colchester
I'm torn between the following lenses, please help me decide!

Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Macro ~ £200 inc
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro ~ £220 inc

I also have heard good things about the Canon 100 EF macro but as it's a bit more expensive I have ruled it out.

There are two reasosn why I want a macro, primarily its to do some creative photography with my 5 month old daughter but I also enjoy plant/wildlife and indoor macro from time to time.

My concern at the moment is that I'm not sure how I would get on with a 90/100mm lens indoors in close quarters when photographing my daughter, but equally a 60mm lens probably needs to be a bit closer to the action, and maybe too close for insects etc.

Any advice or suggestions welcomed

Stu
 
I'd say 90mm if you're planning to go insect snapping. You can take shots of your daughter outdoors if necessary, and get a nicer background to boot (probably). You could also look at the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 if that tickles your fancy (can be had for about the same as the Canon 60).

If you are worried about not being able to take indoor shots, then just buy a nifty aswell. Sorted. ;)
 
Last edited:
I already have the Canon 50mm f1.8 and use it to good effect on most of my portraits, it's just missing theat closeness and 1:1 magnification that the 60 would give me.

I really wish I could try out both lenses for a week or so and see which I am happier with :(
 
If you already have the 50mm 1.8 then I would suggest getting the 90mm. The Sigma 105mm is also worth a look.

If you really need to get up close at ~50mm focal length then maybe get a set of extension tubes rather than buy two lenses of similar focal lengths.
 
Thanks for the links Danza, I've sifted through them once or twice and can't see any real differences.

JoeT you are right I could get a set of extension tubes and I will keep that in mind, but I think the amount of faff that would be involved may mean I don't use as often as I would something dedicated.

The 60 is small and compact, has rave reviews about IQ and it's in a focal range that I already love. The 90 is much bigger/heavier but it offers more opportunities for the future. I guess I should go with my head and buy the Tamron but I can't get the idea of the Canon out of my head.

What I'd love is to be able to compare frames of each lens at say 3, 1.5 and 0.5 meter diatances away from the subject so i can get an idea of how I'd use them in practice.

Is there any way to calculate this?
 
I've got the Sigma 105 and it's a great lens. Not actually done a great deal with it due to lack of time, so I can't actually show you anything taken with it :(
 
Thanks Joe, what I was really after was something that takes into account the magnification factor as well as the focal length but I guess that would be a lot more difficult to build into a model like the Canon one.

ElDude, I havent really heard a lot about the Sigma but as I've heard such good things about the Tamron I pretty much ruled it out, probably a silly thing to do under the circumstances but adding a third lens into the mix in just asking for trouble :)
 
Not exactly great pics, but I've got the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro:

IMG_2034.jpg


IMG_2654.jpg


IMG_2856.jpg


IMG_2814.jpg
 
Cheers,

Hardly had any chances to properly use it. Too busy with work at the mo. All those images are as they came out of the camera. No cropping or sharpening etc.

It is a lovely lens! :)

gt
 
I've gone for the Tamron SP f2.8 DI from Hong Kong

If I find its not working well how I want to use it then it will be off to the bay and the Canon will be it's replacement

Thanks again for your help (pics to follow in a week or two)

Stuart
 
Back
Top Bottom