Canon 100mm f2.8 macro or Tamron 90mm f 2.8 macro?

[design8r]

Which one would you go for? The Canon is more expensive..is it

really much better than the Tamron or is it the brand that's pushing

the price up?

 

thx!

[arie lendra www.arielp.t]

thats true, Tamron 90mm macro lens is a superb lens, comparable to to Canon 100mm(even better) but canon have USM(lot faster and silent focusing, needed in macro), dan all future compability,,,,also high resale value,.....

 

but when i buy lenses, i intend to use it, not to sell it ...hi hi hi

[design8r]

For the record i will be using the lens with the EOS 350D.

[steve santikarn]

Tamron makes excellent macro lens. I got the Canon 100 mm because I like the way you can override the autofocus at anytime by turning the focus ring, on the Tamron it's either auto or manual. While I use manual most of the time it is handy to use the auto focus to get you in the approximate focal range.

[johnb]

kp said: <i>"Which one would you go for?"</i><br>

<br>

I would and have gone for the Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro<br>

Great for portraits (USM focus), and lens doesn't extend for macro.

Plus you get a few extra mm's (10 millimeters)

<br>

You could always <b>try</b> this thought, you bought a Canon camera<br>

might as well put a Canon lens on it. After all they are<br>

worth it (to some photographers).<br>

<br>

Here is a shot I just took with the 100mm f/2.8 macro<br>

<br><center><br><A href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3415203" title="Click to Open Photo Spec page" target="_blank"><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3415203-lg.jpg" alt="Click to see Photo Specs" style="WIDTH: 500px; HEIGHT: 333px"><br>

EF 100mm f/2.8 macro<br>

click for specs

</A></center>

[digitmstr]

The Canon 100 MACRO is a super lens by all accounts. I would buy it over the Tamron if it cost double, which it doesn't. In fact, at B&H, the Tamron is actually $20.00 HIGHER than the Canon.

[digitmstr]

Another point against the Tamron, in addition to price, features and performance, is that its diameter is 55mm. The Canon MACRO is 58mm which means you can share filters with other Canon lenses in that size (like the 85mm, 50mm 1.4, etc...).

 

So, if you want to pay MORE and get LESS...it's up to you.

[yakim_peled1]

<P> All macro lenses are <a href="http://orchideen-kartierung.de/Macro100E.html">optically excellent</a>. However, the 100/2.8 macro USM is the only one which offers you <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#rearinternal">IF</a> (for better balance) and <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#lensmotor">ring USM</a> (when you use it as a <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#macroportrait">portrait lens</a>). It's also the only one which guarantees you that you will not suffer - ever - any <a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#compatibilitythirdparty">future incompatibility problems</a>. This is less an issue with Tamron though. </P>

 

 

 

<P> Happy shooting , <br>

Yakim. </P>

[panos_voudouris]

"Giampiero Scuderi , jun 01, 2005; 04:04 p.m.

In fact, at B&H, the Tamron is actually $20.00 HIGHER than the Canon."

 

"Giampiero Scuderi , jun 01, 2005; 04:08 p.m.

So, if you want to pay MORE and get LESS...it's up to you."

 

The Tamron is a lot cheaper in Europe (or at least in the UK) compared to the Canon. I have it and they only "less" is see is USM. Apart from that it couldn't be better.

[dave henri]

I have been using the Canon 100/2.8 macro for several years now and can state that it is an excellent lens. You'll be surprised how sharp the pictures will turn out. If you're purchasing it for macro photography, you might as well turn off the autofocus. I keep mine in manual all of the time, in order to get that exact spot right in focus. It's a rather heavy lens for walking around with, and I don't usually use it for anything else but macro work.

[design8r]

thx for all your answers, i thought long and hard and decided to go with the Tamron, it is slightly cheaper and since i spent a bomb on the Canon 10-22mm last month i thought i'd go easy on my wallet.

Plus i have read reviews for both and they both excell at macro!