Macro Lens

[tim_kong]

Hi all,

 

I have been trying to get a macro lense to go with my 20D and I am

looking for opinions on the Sigma 50mm 2.8 EX DG AF Macro. The

reason why I am looking at Sigma rather than Canon 50mm 2.5 CM is

because Sigma give a 1:1 life size macro capability while Canon can

only offer half life size. To go for a life size macro in Canon, I

would have to either get a life size converter or a 100mm 2.8 macro

lense. Either one would cost me more than double what the Sigma is

selling. However, I am not sure about the optical quality of this

particular Sigma, so I would appreciate any comments from any one

who have owned/used one before. Your honest opinion please. Thanks.

 

Tim

[tommyinca]

I have used a number of 50mm macros, some 1:1 and some 1:2. Never tried the sigma 50mm however. It does have good review. Here is one if you have not read it already

 

http://www.orchideen-kartierung.de/Macro100E.html

 

With 50mm at 1:1, lighting is a bit more trouble some as the lens will be very close to the subject and in the shadow of the lens. For my 1:2 50mm, I use a 1.4XTC to get closer than 1:2 or switch to a 100mm, 180/200mm depending on what the subject is.

[erin.e]

The Sigma 50mm 2.8 Ex is a very sharp and contrasty lens, it does not have HSM (hypersonic motor) so it is a little slower focusing, however it does have a focus limiter switch that you use if you are not requiring the full 1:1 macro range, this speeds up the focusing of the lens greatly for general photography work.

 

It does hunt a bit on a 10D when light levels are fairly low so manual focusing is the better option there. As the previous poster said the lens would be very close to the subject at full 1:1.

 

I use mine for illustrating optical devices (rifle scopes and binoculars) and for detailed images of parts of those items for reveiw articles in magazines as well as for a general purpose lens. I am very pleased with the quality of the images

 

The build quality is good and it has been very reliable over the two years i have owned it. I will post a sample pic

[erin.e]

While an internet image can't do justice to this lens, here's a 100% crop

[digitmstr]

If you are going to use Manual focus you may want to consider what I think it's one of the best MACRO lenses and at the same time often overlooked...even though it will cost you only betwen $30-$50!

 

It's the "older" MICRO Nikkor 50mm with the original 1:1 ext tube. These can be found on the net for a pittance and the EOS to Nikon adapter is available for appx. $25.00. I had the lens already so, it was a no branier but, even for those who don't the MICRO Nikkor is one of the best MACRO lenses around. At that price it's well worth looking into it.

[yakim_peled1]

<p> I personally believe that a 50mm macro is less useful than 100mm macro. You'll have to get VERY close to your subject to get 1:1 and this is both intimidating and causes severe lightning problems so a dedicated macro flash and a tripod are often a must. </p>

 

 

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

[johnb]

My honest opinion is to agree with Yakim, a 100mm macro can be better for macro shots. I have a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro and it is worth its cost (to my eyes)!

Tim another thing to keep in mind is your lens will probably outlive your 20D and yet its much cheaper.

good luck :+)