Contemplating High End Macro Lenses (for Canon 60D)

[kram]

<p>I just upgraded from a Canon 30D to a 60D and am contemplating upgrading to at least one new macro lens. <br /> <br /> I use the older manual focus Nikkor 55/2.8 (+ M2 tube) and 105/2.8 and have had good results. Since upgrading to the 60D my success rate re: focus seems to be lower with both lenses. I've mostly overcome this by simply making myself work harder at it! <img src="http://forum.mflenses.com/images/smiles/icon_surprised.gif" border="0" alt="Surprised" /> <br /> <br /> I do almost all macro work hand-held. <br /> Here's some of my macro work: <br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/majorblack/" target="_blank">http://www.flickr.com/photos/majorblack/</a> <br /> <br /> When I saw that Canon made a 100/2.8 L with IS, I started thinking... <br /> and then I saw the Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 100mm f/2! <br /> <br /> Such a decision. <br /> <br /> Then there's the Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 50mm f/2! <br /> <br /> The money bit: <br /> Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 100/2: $1843 <br /> Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 50/2: $1283 <br /> Canon 100/2.8 IS: $979 <br /> There's also the same Canon 100mm lens w/o IS: $559 and I could add their ring flash (never have dome macro w/flash but it would eliminate the need for IS) for another $500. <br /> <br /> Right now, I'm leaning toward either the Canon 100mm with IS or the Zeiss 50/2. But I'd eventually want an extension tube for it. Does Zeiss make one for that lens? Probably another $400? <br /> <br /> Any advice welcome!</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>I'm very happy with the Canon 100L macro. The IS is fantastic.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>For a substantial bargain and high IQ, at least consider the <a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/282-tamron-af-90mm-f28-di-sp-macro-test-report--review">Tamron 90mm Macro</a>.</p>

[michaeljlawson]

<p>I was just eyeing up that Tamron and image quality wise it matches up quite nicely in the tests I've seen with the Canon, but with no full time manual focus and the extending front element when focusing, I decided to leave the Canon on my wishlist and wait it out until I can save the extra $$. If money is a bigger consideration than those features however, it's a perfect option.</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>I've been very pleased with the results I get from my EF 100 f/2.8L IS whether I'm using it for macro or other tasks.<br>

I would definately recommend getting the IS especially since as you indicate, "you do almost all macro work hand-held."</p>

[kram]

<p>JDM, looks good but I'm not sure it would be better than my Micro Nikkor 105/2.8.<br>

Jim, yes I'm a hand-holder for sure. The IS is what really appeals to me with the Canon 100mm L.<br>

Even if IS provides only two stops when used in macro mode, that would be huge for me. I typically shoot at 1/100th or faster with my Nikkor 105/2.8 in natural light.<br>

There is the allure of Zeiss glass too but $$$$.</p>

[dan_south]

<p>Since you already have a macro lens, how about investing in more extension tubes or a rail focusing system?</p>

<p>http://reallyrightstuff.com/Items.aspx?code=MACRO&key=cat</p>

 

[zml]

<p>The new Canon100 mm L IS macro is wonderful: it is even better optically than the old 100 macro non-IS (a very good lens already) plus, of course, it is AF and has fantastic IS. As for Zeiss - not all gold that shines.</p>

[esfishdoc]

<p>I love Zeiss and I've used both the Zeiss 100 mm and the Canon 100 2.8 IS.... in this case I would go with Canon. The Zeiss is manual focus and while I like that in say a 21mm I rather like AF in the 100. The Canon wins in magnification and this can really make a difference. I wanted the Zeiss to be better... for me it wasn't. The Zeiss wins in looks and feel but for getting the macro pics I want at 100mm.... the Canon.<br>

Both will take the usual Kenko tubes.<br>

Richard</p>

 

[paddler4]

<p>I did informal tests with my EF 100mm L when it arrived, and my impression is that I was getting at least a 1.5 stop advantage at 1:1. Much more when using it as a telephoto, of course.</p>

<p>With a 50D, I use that lens with bugs, to stay farther away and scare them less. However, I notice you do mostly flowers, as do I. For flowers, I often end up choosing my EF-S 60mm because the shorter working distance is very handy for tripod work. If I were in your shoes, and the cost of the 100mm L were not a concern, I would frankly choose between those two focal length ranges based on preference for working distance.</p>

<p>60mm (with extension):<br>

<img src="http://dkoretz.smugmug.com/Nature/Flowers-and-mushrooms/i-xD8mnzJ/0/L/2011-06-10-202415-ZS-DMap-L.jpg" alt="" width="508" height="600" /><br>

100mm with extension:</p>

<p><img src="http://dkoretz.smugmug.com/Nature/butterflies-damselflies/i-DscQRD3/0/L/MG7252-L.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[nick roberts]

<p>Well the old Canon 100mm USM Macro is better than the AI-S 105mm Nikkor in my experience, and the L lens is better still - and that's just talking IQ. When it comes to ease of use handheld, nothing, but nothing comes close to the L lens IMHO.</p>

[indraneel]

<p><a href="../photo/12643532">Here's an image</a> of mine with the 180mm Tamron. The working distance helped. I used autofocus.</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>No to Zeiss...look for a Voigtlander 125 F2.5 for Canon</p>

[JDMvW]

<p><em>@Major in relation to the 105mm Micro-Nikkor</em><br>

I had the Nikon non-AI 105mm f/4 and it worked beautifully on my camera with an extension tube to go to 1:1. My daughter ended up "taking it off my hands" though. The convenience of the AF on the Tamron is nice when used for larger things, and I don't find the pull-push switch for the AF/MF to be a problem personally.</p>

<p>Non-AI Nikkors are pretty cheap still and I think I paid less than a $170US for mine on eBay. I already had the Nikon extension tubes. It's a cost-effective solution for sure if you don't mind MF, and for actual macro work, most people will stick to MF anyhow, I suspect. At least I do.</p>

[paulie_smith1]

<p>" I do most all macro work hand-held."</p>

<p>This is your first major problem. Sloppy technique and short cuts won't be eliminated by purchasing ever more expensive toys.</p>

[sebastianmoran]

<p>@Major, the images on your flickr page are fabulous. Hand-held flower macros can be frustrating, but you obviously have worked things out.</p>

<p>I like a 50mm-60mm macro lens for flowers hand-held. I use a tripod, focusing rail, and focus stacking when I need more depth of field. I'm tempted to try auto focus-bracketing. </p>

[kram]

<p>Dan M, very nice images. Thanks for sharing. Impressive.<br>

Paulie, you are a charmer! <smooch!> I won't ask what my next major problem is. Do you find my images sloppy? Did you look at them? That said, I'm open to getting better so maybe you have somewhat of a point. <br>

Sebastian, thanks. I find that I tend to make more powerful images when I'm free to move about.<br>

JDM, I do like my non AI 55 and 105mm's. But I would love to try the Canon 100/2.8 IS just to see how we get along. My local camera place has one I can rent, so I'll post some results here.<br>

Robert, you are the second person to suggest the Voigtlander 125 F2.5 for Canon. I'll look around a bit.<br>

Thanks everyone for such good constructive comments and suggestions.</p>

 

[symple]

<p>You have a great series of images, and obviously have developed a technique that works very well. I would stay within the same focal lengths and have a total budget to work under, but get to a camera store that has demo lenses of what you are interested in so you can test your investment for feel first. They will all give you great results, but your current gear is too, so it makes it a tough choice.<br>

How do you find the articulated screen and Liveview are affecting your technique?</p>

 

[kram]

<p>S. Grant, thank you! I will rent the Canon 100/2.8 L IS this week and take her for a spin. You're right that my current lenses are treating me well. The area I see room for extending into is the 100/105mm focal length and being able to do 1:1 handheld with as much DOF as I can muster, while retaining the hand-held option.<br>

I haven't tried Live View yet as I am only on a tripod in the studio- but I shall! Re: the articulated screen; I rarely even look at the screen at all. I just want to make sure that my exposures are close, so I look from time to time. I'd much rather have a super bright viewfinder than a large screen, articulated or otherwise, but I'm old school.</p>

[kram]

<p>@ Richard Hatch. I agree with your astute opinion. Thanks. :)</p>

[kram]

<p>Just picked up the rented Canon 100/2.8 L IS did some quick images to test IS before a serious test tomorrow. First impression, at 1:1, IS was of no help below 1/100. I hand-hold my Nikkor 105/2.8 at that with no IS. I'll have to really test this tomorrow.<br>

Here's an interesting test between the Canon 100mm and the Zeiss 100/2 Makro:<br>

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=891517<br>

Wow! Zeiss! </p>

[JohnMWright]

<p>A friend of mine has the Zeiss 100. The lack of 1:1 is really limiting to him. I see no IQ advantage over the Canon 100s, but the convenience and price of Canon wins easily.</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>Voigtlander 125mm f2.5 does 1:1 without any extension tubes...good luck trying to find one though...It is an APO lens as well</p>

[kram]

<p>Robert, I've been looking for a Voigtlander 125mm f2.5, no luck. :( Anyone have a good source?<br>

I rented the Canon 100/2.8 L IS and did a test for my purposes. IS is supposed to be limited when near 1:1, for me it did not work at all. Was able to hand-hold at 1/100th and faster, as I already do with my NIkkor 105/2.8.<br>

It is very sharp, a bit bulky compared to the Nikkor (USM motor). Not that big an improvement over the Nikkor, so I'll pass.<br>

Here are my test samples (this is not a formal test. It's a test for the way I shoot, hand-held, natutral light): http://markcolman.tv/?p=758<br>

I may rent the Zeiss 100/2 or 50/2 next.</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>The Voigtlander appears on Ebay every once and awhile - the last one sold for approx. $2900 a few days ago (in the Nkon AIS mount that can be used with a converter on a Canon body). One in the Leica "M" mount also sold recently on Ebay for about $1600...that can also be used on a Canon body with a converter.</p>

<p>Prices for this lens have skyrocketed...you might also look at the Leica 100 F2.8 macro - it is also APO and gets really high marks...is readily available and can be used on a Canon body with an adapter. I believe it also goes 1:1</p>

<p>All that being said, if you have a good image, no one is going to ask you what lens you shoot that with? Or tell you the corners are soft...</p>

<p>The Voigtlander is exceptional in that it goes to 1:1 and is APO..and is a wonderful portrait lens. It is made in the Canon mount (and in that C mount lacks an aperture ring - everything is controlled from the camera body) - I have one and love it. When the lens sold for $900 new in 2004-08...or in 2009 about $1000 in mint condition on the used market (after it was discontinued by Cosina) - it was a great deal. Now prices are too high - the word has spread. I got mine for about $1600...which I thought was crazy but now that they sell for $3k, I am not so upset at my splurge (in June 2011).<br>

Anyway, good luck with your search. I like that Leica much...</p>

<div></div>