Canon macro lens question?
- Thread starter aztec80
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The 100 is the most used. I like the 180 as it allows me to be further away from my subject and get macro shots.
The EF-S 60 has the limitation of needing to be close to your subject. Also that lens is meant for APS-C cameras which is what you have. If you ever plan on upgrading I would invest in a lens that can handle a full frame sensor.
The MP-E 65 is really a specialty macro lens and is meant for extreme close ups. To achieve these close ups you need to be able to get right up on your subject. Not easy to do with coral.
Here’s Canons Macros. Be advised you can not use the RF mount lenses.
www.usa.canon.com
The most versatile at a lower cost lens is the 100 and what I would recommend. The IS model can be found on sale many times. It’s nice for the image stabilization capability.
The EF-S 60 has the limitation of needing to be close to your subject. Also that lens is meant for APS-C cameras which is what you have. If you ever plan on upgrading I would invest in a lens that can handle a full frame sensor.
The MP-E 65 is really a specialty macro lens and is meant for extreme close ups. To achieve these close ups you need to be able to get right up on your subject. Not easy to do with coral.
Here’s Canons Macros. Be advised you can not use the RF mount lenses.
Canon DSLR Lenses & Camera Lens Sets: EF & TS | Canon U.S.A, Inc.
Shop our selection of DSLR Lenses. Explore specs, colors, and more from Shop Canon Business U.S.A., Inc. to find the right product for you.
www.usa.canon.com
The most versatile at a lower cost lens is the 100 and what I would recommend. The IS model can be found on sale many times. It’s nice for the image stabilization capability.
Last edited:
aztec80
Community Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2020
- Messages
- 64
- Reaction score
- 25
Thank you very much for the information. I appreciate it.The 100 is the most used. I like the 180 as it allows me to be further away from my subject and get macro shots.
The EF-S 60 has the limitation of needing to be close to your subject. Also that lens is meant for APS-C cameras which is what you have. If you ever plan on upgrading I would invest in a lens that can handle a full frame sensor.
The MP-E 65 is really a specialty macro lens and is meant for extreme close ups. To achieve these close ups you need to be able to get right up on your subject. Not easy to do with coral.
Here’s Canons Macros. Be advised you can not use the RF mount lenses.
Canon DSLR Lenses & Camera Lens Sets: EF & TS | Canon U.S.A, Inc.
Shop our selection of DSLR Lenses. Explore specs, colors, and more from Shop Canon Business U.S.A., Inc. to find the right product for you.
The most versatile at a lower cost lens is the 100 and what I would recommend. The IS model can be found on sale many times. It’s nice for the image stabilization capability.
They aren't new vs old versions but more pro vs consumer.
The IS series lenses or L glass lenses are typically constructed with better motors and image stabilization, which makes them a bit faster than their consumer counter part.
Unless you are trying to go all out pro level photos I would recommend a normal or even used. I have rented quite a few lenses to see if I like them.
aztec80
Community Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2020
- Messages
- 64
- Reaction score
- 25
I was thinking the left one was old and the right was new version. Thanks for the information with that I wouldn't know what's whats.
Attachments
jent
Active Member
Having used both the non-L and the L a fair bit, I would summarize it as.
Major differences:
* L has IS obviously, but not very useful for reef.
* L is weather sealed
Minor differences:
* L is slightly sharper in the center but softer at the edge
* L focuses a tiny bit faster
* L has slightly better color out of camera
I used to rent the L quite often, but now own the non-L f/2.8. Why I choose to save some money:
* IS is nice, and often the reason people point to get the L, but I prefer a tripod for my reef macros. Other handheld macro stuff I try to use a flash anyways.
* Weather sealed is nice, but not a big difference to me for my macro lens.
* Center sharpness is nice, but the non-L is still very sharp!
* The non-L focuses fast enough for my macro needs, and when using a tripod I usually manually focus anyways.
* The color differences can for the most part be corrected in editing anyways.
* The non-L is 58mm filters, so filters are also a bit cheaper
Major differences:
* L has IS obviously, but not very useful for reef.
* L is weather sealed
Minor differences:
* L is slightly sharper in the center but softer at the edge
* L focuses a tiny bit faster
* L has slightly better color out of camera
I used to rent the L quite often, but now own the non-L f/2.8. Why I choose to save some money:
* IS is nice, and often the reason people point to get the L, but I prefer a tripod for my reef macros. Other handheld macro stuff I try to use a flash anyways.
* Weather sealed is nice, but not a big difference to me for my macro lens.
* Center sharpness is nice, but the non-L is still very sharp!
* The non-L focuses fast enough for my macro needs, and when using a tripod I usually manually focus anyways.
* The color differences can for the most part be corrected in editing anyways.
* The non-L is 58mm filters, so filters are also a bit cheaper
chvvkumar
Active Member
I have the 100L I bought used 6 years ago. It's a very good lens. But if you don't have a use for the IS, I say save some money and get the non-L 100m macro. The non-L is about 90% of the lens the 100L is in terms of image quality. The 100L does have a great IS system and is weather sealed.
For reef only I think the 100mm should work ok. But if you want to use it outside for example, to take pictures of bugs or with a macro slider indoors, the 180mm might be a better option.
As an example, this is a picture of my clown with the 100L from about 1 foot away from the fish and almost touching the aquarium glass:
For reef only I think the 100mm should work ok. But if you want to use it outside for example, to take pictures of bugs or with a macro slider indoors, the 180mm might be a better option.
As an example, this is a picture of my clown with the 100L from about 1 foot away from the fish and almost touching the aquarium glass:
The 100mm is excellent, and a true 1:1 macro lens. Its functions as a normal 100mm as well, and is useful for landscapes. Its not great for action shots though, given its long focus rack. Personally, I would get this one as long as you dont plan on taking pictures of children, birds, etc
The 180mm will get you even greater magnification, but is more difficult to use, akin to aiming a telescope at a bug.
Macro photography can be very rewarding but its a little different than regular photography. At larger focal lengths, focus is often achieved by moving the camera itself, as opposed to the focus ring, and requires a special rack. Also, keep in mind longer focal lengths require more light. Shouldn't be a problem in a reef tank though.
A tripod and learning to focus stack is also very helpful.
The 180mm will get you even greater magnification, but is more difficult to use, akin to aiming a telescope at a bug.
Macro photography can be very rewarding but its a little different than regular photography. At larger focal lengths, focus is often achieved by moving the camera itself, as opposed to the focus ring, and requires a special rack. Also, keep in mind longer focal lengths require more light. Shouldn't be a problem in a reef tank though.
A tripod and learning to focus stack is also very helpful.
aztec80
Community Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2020
- Messages
- 64
- Reaction score
- 25
Ok. I'm no photographer just want to get better pictures when I sell coral. I want the person to have no doubts on what they are getting. Thank you for all this knowledge its great
Enjoy it, the 100mm will let you get shots of polyps
namfuak
Active Member
I also own the 100mm and it's a great lens. As @forestsofkelp has said, good lighting and a tripod is pretty crucial. Focus stacking will take your photos to the next level.
I just snapped these shots handheld using manual focus as an example. These were shot at f/5 with a pretty high ISO in order to get a decent shutter speed for my shaky hands, so the DOF is very shallow. My monitor is also calibrated for print, so not sure how these look elsewhere.
I just snapped these shots handheld using manual focus as an example. These were shot at f/5 with a pretty high ISO in order to get a decent shutter speed for my shaky hands, so the DOF is very shallow. My monitor is also calibrated for print, so not sure how these look elsewhere.
Arthur_Dent
Active Member
Honest question. Why buy a lens that is purpose built for macro at all?
You can get amazing results with a ten dollar macro tube on any lens you currently have, if you don't mind manual mode. Or splurge, spend forty bucks, and get the extension tube that has connectors for lens automation built in.
Spend the money you save to buy more corals to photograph...
You can get amazing results with a ten dollar macro tube on any lens you currently have, if you don't mind manual mode. Or splurge, spend forty bucks, and get the extension tube that has connectors for lens automation built in.
Spend the money you save to buy more corals to photograph...
Most Macro lens’ have a dual purpose capability. Meaning they are great for just normal photography or telephoto work. For instance the Canon 100 is a very good portrait lens and landscape lens too. It has the added ability of being a great macro lens.
Extension tubes work well for adapting a standard lens to do macro work and are a great alternative.. the negative is they aren’t as sharp as a dedicated lens. There is usually edge distortion with tubes.
Similar threads
