Macro lens for Canon 20D?

Hi everyone --

 

Still pretty new to the game. I'm interested in buying a macro lens

for my 20D....do I go for the 60mm EF-S lens, which is specifically

for the digital series that the 20D is included, or go for the 100mm

EF lens, which doesn't seem to be a 'digital' lens.

 

Actually, I don't really understand the difference b/w a 'digital'

lens and one that is not. I do get that if I go for the 100mm, if I

upgrade, it will be compatable, but the 60mm will not.

 

any thoughts? THANKS

I have the 100 and it is awesome for macro, close to awesome if a bit long for portraits.

 

Really excellent lens that could almost wear the L tag

 

Gerry

The EF-S 60mm has a couple of advantages:

 

1. It is a useful portrait lens. The 100mm has the FOV of a 160mm lens on a 20D which makes it a bit long for portraiture especially in a studio.

 

2. It is smaller and lighter. (about 4 cm shorter than the 100mm and and weight 335g instead of 600g).

 

The EF 100mm has a couple of advantages:

 

1. The longer focal length gives you greater working distance.

 

2. There is an optional tripod mount.

 

3. It will still work if you upgrade to full frame in the future.

 

The smallness of the 60/2.8 is a big advantage. A macro lens is no good if it is not with you when you need it.

 

On the other hand the working distance at 1:1 of the 100mm is about 5 inches as opposed to 4 inches for the 60mm.

 

On film my Tamron 90/2.8 served double duty as my portrait lens but now I use the 50/1.8 as my standard portrait lens. So I wouldn't worry about having the macro lens serve two purposes.

 

Only your know whether you will be upgrading your camera soon.

thanks for the quick response!

 

So, basically, both of these lens will work fine with the 20D?

Yes. I have 100 and I'm very happy with it with my 20D. It's little long for portraits but at f 2.8 what a beautiful bokeh! In macro territory it's great and longer working distance then 60 is good for shooting shy creatures.It's heavy but balances well with the camera.

"So, basically, both of these lens will work fine with the 20D?:

 

Yes, they will.

 

You might also want to consider the EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro. Another great multi-purpose lens (macro / portrait / low light). Slightly faster than either the 60 or 100, and slightly wider field of view than the 60. Also compatible with full frame, like the 100.

 

No USM, and only 1:2 max magnification, but one of the sharpest, most distortion-free lenses in the Canon EF line-up.

 

I bought a 100/2.8 Macro, and while I admired its macro capabilities, I found it too long on 1.6x 10D/20D for portrait, so I exchanged it for the 50. This was before the 60 was available, but I'm not a fan of EF-S, and I'm completely satisfied with the 50.

The 60mm EF-S can be used on a full frame camera as a macro lens (you won't be able to use it for long focus distances) mounted on an EF 12 Mk II (or longer) extension tube - the image circle is adequate to cover full frame, and you get maximum magnification of about 1.2. You need a Mk II tube to be able to mount the EF-S lens.

 

I suspect the more relevant data for working distance relate to magnifications of 0.625 on a crop camera, which give an image that covers the same subject as 1:1 with full frame.

Matt:

I used just about all of them, and placed a way of considering which to purchase here for

download:

 

http://postit.rutgers.edu/uploads/Macro%5FWork%5FDistance1.pdf

 

Jack

I went for the 50mm 2.5 macro for my 20D. It was the first lens I bought and looking at my macro shots this lens is very sharp. Great for portraits too.

Don't worry about 'for digital' stuff, that is just marketing.

 

I have the EF 100mm with the 20D and it is an excelent macro lens.

 

The EF-S 60mm is ment to be very sharp as well but has a much shorter working distance - distance between the front of the lens and the subject at maximum magnification. This makes it difficult to keep light on the subject and increases the chances of scaring bugs off.

 

If you want a fast portrait lens in the 50mm region you would be better off with the 50mm f1.4 as this can give much tighter control over depth of field.

What Alistair said.

 

I have the 50/2.5, 60/2.8 and 100/2.8USM macro lenses, bought over many years not long after each was released, and during that period I have moved from film to a 20D. I make a lot of use of the MR-14EX ring flash, and one further point to add to what Alistair said is that the MR-14EX and MT-24EX are marginally more convenient on the two shorter lenses because they do not require any filter to be removed.

 

The 50/2.5 is optically excellent, but much less convenient in use compared to the 60/2.8. For my botanical work I generally use the 60/2.8, with the 100/2.8 only being used when I need a bit more reach. Even the 100/2.8 is too short for nervous insects, although I have some good shots of the dragonfly Libellula depressa with it - the males perch conspicuously and are reasonably approachable. For butterflies I usually use my 135/2 on the EF25 tube. Works really well and the MR-14EX will fit using the 72C adapter without vignetting. I don't do enough insect work to justify a long macro like the 180/3.5.

 

What's missing for the 1.6-factor cameras is a copying lens, for which purpose even the 50/2.5 is too long - it's perfect for photographing paintings and drawings on FF.