ymages Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 I am looking for a (very) good Macro for canon EOS 20D shall I take aCanon a Tamron ?and which one ? thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfrey Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 Canon's EF100/2.8 Macro lens is superb. Godfrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted January 24, 2005 Author Share Posted January 24, 2005 nearlly 700 euros .... ! is there any Tarmon very good too and cheaper ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted January 24, 2005 Author Share Posted January 24, 2005 I found that >> http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/can-tam-macro/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnb Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 Erick<br> The Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro is a superb lens! Top quality, should be "L" rated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.W. Wall Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 Ditto on the 100mm f/2.8 Canon EF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 I have two macro lenses. A Canon 100mm and a Sigma 180mm. Neither is perfect as in "all encompassing." They compliment each other and both make mighty fine primes. If I had to make a choice, which one first, I'd go with the Sigma 180mm, based upon my personal needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
model mayhem gallery Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 I just purchased my first Sigma lens the 70-200 2.8 EX and I love it. If I were to buy a Macro lens it would be hard to choose between a Sigma 2.8 or faster EX or a Canon L-series or prime. I don't know if I woule use Tamaron I have heard they are pretty cheap, but Tokina also seems to have some nice stuff. In a head to head comparrison between the Sigma and Canon L the Sigma was extremely close.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted January 24, 2005 Author Share Posted January 24, 2005 then I don't know now waht to choos .. I though the CANON 100mm I am no an expert :-) but Macro is what i like the most i must have a look to this sigma thank you very much for your help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_eaton Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 The Canon over the Tamron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted January 24, 2005 Author Share Posted January 24, 2005 yes and there no such a price difference .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 Your choice of macro lens depends first on the sort of subjects you intend to take. You will have more success if you are trying to shoot butterflies and other skittish insects if you use a longer focal length, such as 180mm. On the other hand, for e.g. stamps and coins and other copy stand work you will find a 50mm is much more useable. Good macro lenses will put all your other lenses to shame for sharpness, whichever manufacturer you choose. For 50mm, I would choose the Sigma f/2.8 EX DG over the Canon compact macro f/2.5 (which only goes to half life size without the added Life Size Converter, which is effectively a 1.4x TC). For 180mm, the Tamron f/3.5 Di lens is optically better than the more expensive Canon L lens. For ~100mm, again my choice would be the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di, which is an improved version of the non-Di lens - particularly as in Europe is also a cheaper option than the Canon 100. Look here for some comparative reviews - but bear in mind this (and the test on this site) refer to the earlier version of the Tamron 90mm lens: http://orchideen-kartierung.de/Macro100E.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack paradise Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 "nearlly 700 euros .... ! is there any Tarmon very good too and cheaper?" Yes, the Tamron 90mm macro. Someone has posted a link on a Canon-Tamron comparison. Have you read it ? The difference in image quality is so small that it doesnt warrant the price difference. Need more info ? Go to www.photodo.com or get yourself some Chasseur d'Images lens test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted January 24, 2005 Share Posted January 24, 2005 Here in the US, the Tamron is $10 cheaper than the Canon. I didn't think saving 10 bucks was worth it. It might not be the same over there, but the $450 that it would cost you in the US works out to be less than 350 Euros. AOLServer hates the Euro symbol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted January 25, 2005 Author Share Posted January 25, 2005 yes i dont care fore 50$ or euros difference ... and all your experiences are welcome i am now again between the canon 100 and the tamron 90 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 In the US, the difference between the Tamron and the Canon version is that the Canon version is about a hundred Euros more then the Tamron model. So if I was torn and the Euros were there, I'd get the more expensive Canon as I'm guessing that ego's in play here. Which is not a bad thing from my POV:) As to image quality, there's no question, they're all capable of producing first class images. Now the question becomes about build quality, look/finish and what you want (ego) to go in your camera bag. In my case, ego, I wanted Canon so the name of the lense would match the name on the EF 24EX flash that was going to be attached to the front of the lense. So unless you're not human, cool is important. Wellllll, after getting and using this fine lense, I found out that I wasn't happy with the usage of the lense and ended up getting a Sigma 180mm f/3.5. The name doesn't match the flash, I'm crushed, but the working distance is more to my working style. I'm quite happy with the overall look/finish of the Sigma 180mm macro but again I'm not happy with the working distance from smaller items, 1" long or less. So, now I'm in need of Canon's 25mm extension tube so as to be able to get close enough for my particular desires. The point of my above, ego aside, be sure the 100mm macro will suit your working style or purpose as I'm sure you're not gonna want ta spend the Euro's on a 100mm macro just in-time to find out that your shooting style demands a 180mm macro. Oh and an important aside, you'll need to consider extension rings with decent flash lighting as both are a necessary consideration; twinhead flash EF-24EX is best, as with macro photography, lighting (f/16~f/32) becomes everything. You do have a decent tripod set up as macro doesn't lend itself well to handholding for the really small stuff as DOF couldn't get much smaller. Wishing you luck and looking forward to your posting your decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awindsor Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 I was in the same situation in the UK and bought the Tamron. Optically there is not much to pick between them. In some tests the Tamron comes out on top. The Canon has 1) USM - this is not as much benefit as it seems since it is still quite slow to AF because of the focus throw. This is only really of interest if you intend doing something with the lens other than macro. 2) Internal focusing - this means than the lens barrel is fixed and hence can support a ring light. Attaching a ringlight to the Tamron is not possible. Currently I use a single diffused flash on a macro bracket and have no plan to invest in a ringlight. 3) Optional tripod bracket - this could be a big convenience. I have an L bracket for my camera and battery pack that makes the change in framing from changing orientation very small. The Tamron has a recessed front element. Often it is difficult to use a lens hood and the recessed front element is helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Another point of negative interest, against the Tamron lense is that it uses a AF/MF clutch system that makes changing between AF/MF a pain. I have the same sort of clutch system on a Sigma 15-30 and didn't like it one bit. I don't know if the Sigma macro uses a switch to turn AF on or off, if it has fulltime manual focus or if it uses a slider for the clutch. Maybe someone who has a Sigma macro can chime in here on that point. Fulltime manual focus is a definite plus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith turrill Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 I had very good performace from the Canon 100mm last year. Most of the time I found manual focus more reliable than auto and leave the lens locked in manual. Concerning a previous comment about f-stops, the most frequent settings that I used for insects were f13 to f16. As an entirely seperate issue, you may see sharply focused sensor dust at those settings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ymages Posted March 16, 2005 Author Share Posted March 16, 2005 I come back a bit late ,, i finally choosed the 100mm canon (ego maybe :)) thank you to everybody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now