First macro lens for Canon?

V

Volume

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
4,010
I have a Rebel XSi and want to purchase an EF series macro lens for it. Not EF-S since I won't be able to bring that over to a full-frame camera down the road. Unless you can convince me otherwise?

I'm not looking for a terribly long focal length, as I'm more interested in shooting inanimate objects rather than bugs and insects. Again, unless you can convince me that there could be more uses for a higher focal length.

I'd like to keep the price below $350.

Thanks!
 
I use the Tamron 90mm (mine is the Nikon-mount version) - it's an amazing lens! It is sharper and has better bokeh than most of the Nikkor lenses I own. Only downside of this from "pro-grade" macro's is the auto-focus is slow and hunts a lot, but imo the manual focus on this lens works so well you'll never miss using auto. The image quality of this is as good or better than most of the pro macro's.

I'd highly recommend that one. I really think the price difference over your target-range would be completely worth it.

:) Samples just in case...
callaway1.jpg


callaway2.jpg


callaway4.jpg
 
You might be able to pick up a used Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro for that price range, possibly even the USM version if you get lucky. That'd probably be your best bet.

There's also the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro which is exceptionally sharp but the focus motor is a bit slow for non-macro use and the lens barrel extends while focusing. I sold mine for $290

Here's a good write-up comparing the Canon, Tamron, and Sigma ~100mm f/2.8 macro lenses: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-100mm-f-2.8-USM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx
 
You are in luck in that nearly all of the macro lenses out there offer very nice optics and IQ. The main differences are in handling (i.e. internal focusing and speed of focusing). Get what you can afford and don't look back.
 
Rent it first. ie www.lensrentals.com - I've been eying the 100mm f2.8, but its a distant fourth/fifth on my want list. I'm eying up other lenses ie; 10-22 EF-S, 70-200 f2.8 or even a set of strobes/off camera flash outfit. I don't know what your budget is, but try before you buy - before making the jump.

I was concerned about the full frame/crop issue - but don't let it scare you. The only area of concern is the coverage on the wide/ultra-wide end.
 
Cong Sat said:
I was concerned about the full frame/crop issue - but don't let it scare you. The only area of concern is the coverage on the wide/ultra-wide end.
Click to expand...
I probably won't be investing in any EF-S lens at all, as they won't be compatible with the full frame cameras once I upgrade. I do have a question though... would a 10-22 EF-S display any differently than a 10-22 EF (assuming it exists)?
 
My recommendation would be the 100 mm 2.8, it also doubles as a great portrait lens and is notoriously sharp. I am very happy with mine.
 
Last edited:
No ef-10-22 exists. But on a crop camera, the mount would not matter.
 
Last edited:
10-22 lens = the focal length of 16-35 on a full frame.

The only reason I want the 10-22 is because I shoot with a 24-70L and the the wide end isn't as wide as I got with the full frame camera. Yes, I compared - I have a FF film body.

I finally made the switch to digital less than 6 months ago. I was saving for a full frame, but decided on a crop sensor (used 40D, the price was right!). My big concern was the smaller viewfinder/prism. Well I adjusted quickly when the workflow was easier and allowed more leeway in post. I was shooting film and scanning them with a dedicated slide/film scanner. I also have a 42" printer for prints, so resolution was another concern - but interpolation software has helped things.

Ultimately, its up to you on the FF body. Your needs and budget will be different from everybody elses. Either way, get away from the cheap lenses and start using/buying quality glass. Either way you win.
 
quality glass and cheap lenses doesnt have to be separate... tamron 70-200 f2.8 is sharper than my f4 24-105 L at 70mm, or 100mm. Always. Got my tamron for $670. the tamron doesnt have IS, and the motor sucks and is noisy, but for $670 what do you expect. The thing is still sharp as hell. I bought it after seeing some guy with both do a comparison shot of the canon L 70-200 f2.8 and the tamron and they were 99.9999% the same.

basically if you search around for reviews you should be able to determine if tamron or sigma offers a comparable offering for half the price of a canon lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top