birger hoglund Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Intend to buy a macro to my Canon 5D. Tamron 90 2,8 or Canons 100 2,8 with USM? Is there anyone how can give me som information to conseder of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_houtmeyers Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Here's some usefull info. http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/can-tam-macro/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_houtmeyers Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Another link. http://www.orchideen-kartierung.de/Macro100E.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester_wareham Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 I have the canon myself. The Canon is internal focus which I don't think the Tamron is. The advantage of this is the Canon front elements does not move as you change focus. Additionally the Canon has USM and full time manual focus and makes a useful normal telephoto lens with reasonably fast and silent AF. Both should be sharp. At macro distances most of the published sharpness tests are not imformative. One test that is is linked below. http://www.nnplus.de/macro/Macro100.html web translation http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nnplus.de%2Fmacro%2FMacro100.html&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Looks like the Tamron came out better in this test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robin_sibson1 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 I am sure there must be some optically poor macro lenses out there, but they seem hard to find! Also, macro lenses have to be reasonably well-built, even those with IF designs, to accommodate the wide focusing range. So the choice comes down much more to issues of handling and convenience, and the Canon lens certainly scores highly there. It has a focus limiter to prevent it from racking right out to 1:1 and back when trying to find focus in 'normal' use, and that the Canon macro flashes (MR-14EX and MT-24EX) will mount directly on it (provided no filter is fitted). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester_wareham Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 "Canon macro flashes (MR-14EX and MT-24EX) will mount directly on it (provided no filter is fitted)." Just to fill that point of Robins out a bit more. a) The MT-24EX has a thread you can mount a filter on or a special macro lens hood for use with the twin flash. b) You can get around the no filter issue by using the Canon Macrolite adaptor, which screews into an ordinary filter thread and has the lip for the two macro flashed. The same adaptors can be used for non-macro lenses on tubes or non-Canon lenses. They are available in 52. 58 and 72mm sizes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robin_sibson1 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Yes, Lester, I don't know why they did not put that thread on the MR-14EX too - maybe they did not think of it until the MT-24EX. I have used the lens-filter-58adapter sequence, and spent a happy couple of hours thereafter trying to un-jam the adapter from the filter. Irritatingly, you can't fit a lens cap to the adapter, so it cannot conveniently be left on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester_wareham Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Hi Robin. I think the thread for the twin is intended for the lens hood - not meany people know about that. I have some shots of it here http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Macro_Equipment.htm#Macro%20Flash I tend the adaptor keeps comming loose from the filter! If they get stick try putting a rubber band around the offending parts to improve grip. I find the cap fits on OK although its not that secure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester_wareham Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Wow, my typing was bad there. I ment to say; the adaptor tens to keep comming loose for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robin_sibson1 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Lester, I was completely unaware of the existence of that curious little hood. We live and learn. That's obviously the explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ko photo Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 I use the canon 100 and have enjoyed great results...the newer longer 150-180 also offer great opportunity with distance... all depends on $ but the best results i have had is with the canon and i really didn't thing there was enough diff. when compared to like the sigma, but the canon wins out time and again...but my opinion only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 So far as macro flashes are concerned, it's worth noting that the Sigma EM 140 DG (roughly equivalent to the Canon MR 14EX, with E-TTL and master capability inter alia) comes with 55 and 58mm adaptors as standard (Sigma also sell 62, 72 and 77mm adaptors, allowing it to be used with a variety of other lenses). Personally, I find that using a regular flash on an off camera shoe cord allows more even lighting because extreme inverse square falloff (inevitable with flash mounted near the front of the lens) can be avoided, and the light can be easily modified with a diffuser and reflected with something as simple as a sheet of paper on a clipboard to provide some fill. Ringflash is perhaps more an essential with shorter focal lengths and working distances, such as with the MP-E 65mm. Back to the topic of macro lenses... I note that the nnplus site linked above includes a very favourable review of the new Tokina 100mm f/2.8 (though not as yet of the new, optically redesigned Sigma 105mm f/2.8, which Photozone found to be optically as good as the Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM on a 1.6 crop body), which only goes to prove the point that all these lenses are top quality optics. Since I also own other faster aperture USM lenses of similar focal length that I use in low light, for portraiture, and for sport type applications for which they clearly outscore the Canon 100mm in speed of focus and light gathering, I never felt I needed to consider the Canon for other than macro work. Living in Europe where the Canon is rather more expensive than the Tamron, I have the Tamron as my ~100 macro lens. I have never found the extending front to be an issue, since practical macro work at high magnification usually entails moving the entire camera to get the optimum focus having chosen a magnification for composition (using AF and focus points is rarely copathetic with image composition). Note that the front element does not rotate, so there is no fundamental problem with using a ringflash should you want to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awindsor Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 I am not sure I would want to hang a heavy flash off the extending Tamron barrel. Having said that I bought my macro lens when I was living in a drizzly island near Europe and the price difference lead me to purchase the Tamron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_white2 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 I use the 90mm TS-E with extension tubes for macro work. Since the depth of field is so shallow, I find it's very helpful to be able to adjust the plane of focus. By tilting the lens, you can place the plane of sharp focus pretty much wherever you want it. The lens is compatible with the 1.4x extender as well for even more magnification. I haven't tried the 2x extender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wes_baker1 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 I have the Sigma 105/2.8. Outstanding optics. I almost always shoot macro from a tripod, with manual focus, so focus speed is irrelevent to me. Also, the non-rotating front element of the Sigma is so deeply inset into the barrel that a hood is probably superflous. But Sigma supplied one with the lens, and I always use it anyway. Maybe it offers a slightly higher amount of protection from the nasty spiders I end up shooting with that lens so often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robin_sibson1 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Peter, thanks for reminding us about the TS90. It seems like a very interesting lens for close-up work, with focus to about 1/3 on its own and to about 2/3 with the EF25 tube, and of course with the tilt capability which I have often felt the need for. The Canon flashes will mount using the Macrolite Adapter 58. Do you use it most for a particular type of subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_white2 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 I sell lots of small metal and plastic parts, anywhere from 10mm in length and larger. With a standard lens it's difficult to get the best view of the part, to show the customer what it is, and also get as much of it in focus as possible. With the tilt function, it's much easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robin_sibson1 Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 Thanks, Peter, the TS90 does sound ideal for that job. 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