New to maro with 5D

[eleta]

Hi, need some advice please. I am new to digital having recently

bought a 5D and a 24-105 f4L lens. I love the lens but would like to

get in closer and have a go at macro. I'm not interested in shooting

tiny bugs but more interested in capturing fine detail, eg flowers

and still life. Would a canon 100mm macro do what I want or do I

need extension tubes as well? keep reading about people using them

and 1.4x converters and am confused as to what I should get.

[ifeito]

The 100 mm f/2.8 would be a great macro lens for the 5D. It would also double as a very nice portrait lens. However you cannot use the 1.4x and 2.0x extenders on it.

 

To be able to use those on a macro lens you would need the 180 mm f/3.5 L macro lens. The added focal lenght gives this lens a very good working distance, but makes it a rather odd mid-telephoto lens. You can use the extenders, which allows you to achieve greater than 1:1 magnification. It's also about $750 dollars more than the 100 mm.

 

The new sigma 150 mm has received excellent reviews, but I haven't used it, so I can't say much about it. Also, I was burned by a Sigma lens once and I won't be using their products in the foreseeable future.

 

Ignacio

[carl_weller]

It depends on what you want to shoot.

 

A 5D with the 100mm Macro is fine for flowers and some still ife, but is too short for tiny bugs (they fly/run away because you are so close) and you generally need more than 1:1 for them anyway because they are so small.

 

If you are shooting anything the size of a 35mm frame (24mmx36mm)or bigger and it wont fly/run away, then the 100mm is fine.

 

If you want to magnify further than 1:1 you will need to look at close up lenses or extension tubes.

 

regards,

[ryan mcgill - trm photo st]

The Sigma 150mm MACRO 2.8 EX DG is a good lens. Here is a link to some images I took with it: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=588335

[trothwell]

I just bought a 50mm macro lens for my 5D, and took <a href="http://www.trevisrothwell.com/photos/200604-macro">a few test shots</a> with it this past weekend. I wasn't after super-duper closeups, but primarily wanted to get somewhat close pictures of flowers. I think I'm happy with this lens for that.

[scott_eaton]

The 100mm Canon Macro is the best suggestion here.

 

I sold my 50mm Canon Macro. Great lens, but the 100 is much easier to work with because of working distance.

[tommyinca]

If you have the cash, get the macro. A 2nd cheaper option is for about $80, you can get a 12.5mm extension tube. It will work for flower and still life life close up. Buy the macro lens later as an up-grade. A 12.5 mm extension always comes in handy even if you have a macro lens.

[patricks]

the tamron 90/2.8 is very good but with the MIR right now the Canon 100/2.8 is even cheaper and would be your best choice.

[brent chadwell]

I would definitely go with the 100/2.8. The sharpness is equal to some L lenses, and it gives enough working distance for what you will be using it for. The 180mm f/3.5L macro is a great lens, one of Canon's sharpest (behind f/2.8 super teles). However, I don't think it's worth more than double the price tag of the 100/2.8. Also, even the 180mm only does 1:1, and you don't need the increased working distance to shoot flowers or people.

[andy10]

Canon 100mm f/2.8 lens is on everybodies recommendation.. I guess if you are looking for longer working distance, the Tamron 180mm macro comes very close to Canon 180mm macro.. It has good optics, lighter and cheaper that canon.. They also have less compatibility issues than other non-canon vendors.

[mormegil]

I'm not a big macro shooter (no pun intended), but wanted to try my hand at it. I didn't want to buy a whole macro lens, so I went with extension tubes instead.

 

I got the Kenko set, and am pretty happy with them. I often use it either with the 24-105 or 50 1.8 (I can get greater than 1:1 with that set up).

 

Here's a couple of examples

 

With the 50 1.8, using the 25mm (about 1:1): http://static.flickr.com/53/132256980_3c57c43d02.jpg

 

 

With the 24-105 at 105, using the 12mm (not too close): http://static.flickr.com/1/128154838_6ac4ac886c_o.jpg

[lester_wareham]

The 100mm f2.8 is great for bugs - a good compromise for weight and working distance for handholding with flash.

 

The 180 is an excelent lens with more working distance and able to use TCs directly but is quite heavy.

 

Note the Canon TCs can be used with the 100 f2.8 by inserting a small ext tube between the two. Quite a lot of the people on the Canon Digital Photography Macro forum http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=38 seem to do that with good results - have'nt tried it myself yet.

[jerry_liles]

The 100mm usm macro is a great lens but not as good on the full frame Canons. I have the 1DSII and the apparrent focal length is not as useful as with the small sensor 10 and 20D. The 180mmL macro provides much better distance and DOF with the full size sensor. I have taken some outstanding macros with my 100mm/10D combo but was dissapointed with the 100mm/1DSII combo. The 1DSII brings out the limitations of the 100mm Macro lens, which is of course not L quality.

[ifeito]

Jerry,

 

Are you seriously seeing differences in resolution on the 100 mm macro between the 10D and the 1DsII?

 

Ignacio