Macro

[simon_t1]

<p>Hi,<br>

I am thinking of purchasing a macro lens for the 7D, between the 100mm L IS or the 60mm EF-S.<br>

The advantage of the 60mm is more DOF, but the 100mm is an L and should produce quality images. I cannot try any of the lenses , therefore I don't know their performance..<br>

Can you please help me decide.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Simon.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Simon,</p>

<p>It depends on what you want to photograph and your subject distances. I have used both and for general use I'd go for the 60 on the 7D and 100 on a FF.</p>

[tony_leinster]

<p>Simon,<br>

if you browse sites such as slrgear.com or photozone.de you will find plenty of info regarding these lenses and may be pleasantly surprised by the quality of the 60mm Macro. I have used both and find the 60mm to be pretty much as good as the L in real life. However, there is one other factor to be considered, are you photographing live subjects, ie insects etc. because in this case the extra reach of a 100mm will help. Just because you will not have to get as close to the subject and maybe scare it off! If you are taking anything inert then the 60 is fine and will save you some of the green stuff lol.</p>

[lester_wareham]

At macro magnifications dof is independent of focal length, depending only on effective apature. Effective apature

depends largely on magnification with a second order effect dependent on lens deign.

 

The upshot is for the same exposure you have the same dof.

 

Both the 60mm and 100mm classic macro produce very high quality images so I would expect similar quality in the

real world from the 100mm IS. Main 100mm IS advantages are obviously IS, perhaps better build, disadvantage price

and need of an adaptor for macro flash use.

 

The new IS is ment to work at higher magnifications but often the limiting factor is subject movement due to small air

movements.

 

The 100mm length is probably better in terms of working distance for most macro subjects.

[steve_wagner1]

<p>I would look at a Sigma 180 or Tamron 180 over the Canon 100L, easier shooting (18 inches as opposed to 12) and still blazing sharp just like the Canon, and you save over $200-300</p>

[ilya_e]

<p>I'd also recommend 60mm for a crop and 100mmL for FF. 60mm is a really good macro lens that can also be used to make great portraits.</p>

[paddler4]

<p>I have both and have shot extensively with both on a crop-sensor camera. If you search on this site, you will find a lot of discussions of this comparison. IMHO:</p>

<p>--I agree that the optical quality of the 60mm is superb, and in real life, you probably won't see much difference.</p>

<p>-- I don't agree that the 60mm is always the best choice with a crop sensor camera. Depends on what you shoot. With bugs, I generally use the 100mm because the extra reach is a big help. With static subjects, e.g., flowers indoors, I usually end up using the 60mm. The 60 is easier to handle (shorter, lighter). Yes, the 60 is a nice length for portraits, but if you want a moderate telephoto, the 100 is dandy for that.</p>

<p>BTW, if you move the camera so that the subject size is the same with both lenses, you won't see much difference in DOF. Check out http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm for an explanation. What you will see is less background blur with the 60mm, but that is a different issue. Both have very nice bokeh, IMHO.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>If the subject matter is live and animate, then the longer the macro the better, regardless of sensor size. This is because the longer lens gives more subject to lens distance.</p>

<p>Otherwise, not so much difference.</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>I also have a 7D, and had the 60 mm, but found the working distance too close. I now have the 100mm L, and love it. The extra distance helps tremendously, especially with insects. The IS helps with handheld shots, but for the best clarity, you're still better off with a tripod and macro rail.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I have the 100 f2.8 L IS and shoot both full frame and also APS-C with a 7D. The 100 works fine on the 7D for macro and i have had no issues with it. Any of the 3 lenses (60, 100 and 100L) will be fine the real issue is what else you want to do with the lens. I have found that the 100 LIS is a great portrait lens, especially on full frame but quite usable on my 7D. The IS does come in handy for flower type shots when hiking and for portrait use handheld. Obviously it is a much more expensive lens but does have more versitility.</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>Aperture and subject magnification are what determine depth of field. For the same subject magnification, DOF will be identical between the 60mm and 100mm.</p>

<p>The longer the lens, the more working distance you'll have between the front of your lens and the subject. If you add extension tubes so you can focus even closer, you'll appreciate every millimeter of working distance you have. :) The longer the distance, the easier you'll find it to light your subject, as well.</p>

<p>I debated between the 180 and 100. In the end, I went with the 100/2.8L IS because I could see the IS coming in handy sometimes. And it does. It's also a lighter lens than the 180, and I'll be more likely to carry it. The same could be said for the 60mm. If you're taking photos of inanimate objects, the subject distance really only matters as far as your convenience. If you're taking pictures of moving critters, extra space helps.</p>

<p>Eric</p>