Any input on macro lens? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/17/2013 03:08:07 PM · #1

Hi folks,

I'm just curious to get everyone's opinion here. I'm looking at picking up a used macro lens, and have the 2 following candidates:

Canon 100mm
Tamron 90mm

I just want to know if there's any real reason to get the pricier Canon over the Tammy? Everything I read says both have excellent, virtually indistinguishable image quality. If that's true, is there any point spending the extra $$$ to get the Canon? I know there's USM which may or may not be a selling point.

I like this focal length, and wouldn't want shorter. I don't mind longer, but the Sigma 150 is almost same price as Canon on the used market.

Usage would be the usual...insects, flowers etc. Right now, my 50mm is all I have and it's just not cutting it.

Any suggestions?

Beetle

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

04/17/2013 03:19:24 PM · #2

This isn't exactly what you asked for, but maybe it helps, anyway.

I couldn't afford the Canon lens, so I bought the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro, instead.

I love it! It is tack sharp, makes a nice "normal" lens, too, and I like the 105mm.
The only downside is that in macro, sometimes the auto focus does too much "hunting", but even that isn't an issue since I normally use manual focus for macros, anyway.

Samsung Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra

04/17/2013 03:23:47 PM · #3

I had considered the Siggy 105mm, and have read many rave reviews of its optical performance. But after repeatedly reading that the AF performance was "woeful" rendering the lens all but useless for non-macro work where AF is required, I scrapped it from the list.

Tiberius

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

04/17/2013 03:33:14 PM · #4

My next lens is a macro too. I had the 100 mm 2.8 the non IS version and I was very pleased. But it was stollen. My next one will be second hand IS L version. The reviews and input here on DPC (

Bear_Music has it) convinced me. Robert described it as a stunningly good lens. So I would rather save a bit longer and go for it.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

04/17/2013 03:39:07 PM · #5

I have on experience with the Tammy, but I own the Canon 100/2.8. The Canon is a non-extending design, which is a very nice feature. The Tamron is an extending design. Optically I think you'd be very happy with either one. I know the reports on build quality say the Tamron is good, and I can say the Canon's build is excellent.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/17/2013 06:03:56 PM · #6

For me it's no contest: I cannot STAND an extending lens in macro work, it's just annoying. Plus the latest generation of the Canon 100mm f/2.8, the L/IS version, has this incredibly effective new IS system designed to function in closeup work. I don't think anything else is in the ballpark, frankly...

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

04/17/2013 06:04:20 PM · #7

Originally posted by kirbic:

Fritz, how adept would you say the EF 100mm is for non-macro work in terms of speed and accuracy of the AF?

spiritualspatula

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

04/17/2013 06:12:40 PM · #8

Originally posted by Garry:

Originally posted by kirbic:
I have on experience with the Tammy, but I own the Canon 100/2.8. The Canon is a non-extending design, which is a very nice feature. The Tamron is an extending design. Optically I think you'd be very happy with either one. I know the reports on build quality say the Tamron is good, and I can say the Canon's build is excellent.

Fritz, how adept would you say the EF 100mm is for non-macro work in terms of speed and accuracy of the AF?

First- as a general thing to consider, there is not a macro lens on the market that will focus as well as a non-macro equivalent. It's due to the immense focus range. They tend to search, and using the limiter switch (if the lens has one) is ALWAYS recommended to decrease this.
I just want you to be realistic- I feel some people expect macro lenses to behave the same with AF, but they frankly just won't. This doesn't mean you can't use them for other situations, but a sports lens they are NOT.

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

04/17/2013 06:16:28 PM · #9

Thanks, Derek. I certainly don't expect the lens to function like a non-macro lens, but would be great if it was "useable" in such scenario.

skewsme

Canon EOS-6D

04/17/2013 06:22:06 PM · #10

I've used it as a walkaround and it's fine for a lot of subjects, has great color. But if you try to use it for say, birds in the sky or wolves in the distance, you'll get a fair amount of chromatic aberration. And whereas I always manually focus for macros, I find the auto focus works ok for stuff that's several feet away.

ShaneBlake

Nikon D7100

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Nikon

04/17/2013 06:23:43 PM · #11

I have the Tamron and love it. It will hunt a bit to focus, but hardly ever if I'm using it for portraits. The limit switch is a must in macro mode.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/17/2013 06:26:11 PM · #12

Originally posted by Garry:

Thanks, Derek. I certainly don't expect the lens to function like a non-macro lens, but would be great if it was "useable" in such scenario.

The Canon's an exceptionally accurately-focusing lens in the "normal" range, completely apart from sporting stellar performance in the macro end of things. I have absolutely no complaints regarding its focusing performance. Or anything else for that matter.

bohemka

Nikon D700

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM for Nikon

04/17/2013 07:49:33 PM · #13

Apparently there's a new Tamron 90mm available with image stabilization and an internal focusing mechanism so it doesn't pinocchio.

It's obviously more expensive, but the optics are proven. I have the "old" one and have no complaints.

samkay

04/18/2013 04:30:48 AM · #14

I've often wished I had a slightly longer lens than my Canon 100f2.8... You'll be surprised how that extra distance prevents those little critters from flying off!

Message edited by author 2013-04-18 08:32:14.

Alex_Petrini

Sony Alpha a7R III

Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM

04/18/2013 05:16:20 AM · #15

I have the 90mm. and it's great. Very slow but the image quality is amazing for the price you pay for that lens.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

04/18/2013 08:24:48 AM · #16

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Garry:
Thanks, Derek. I certainly don't expect the lens to function like a non-macro lens, but would be great if it was "useable" in such scenario.

The Canon's an exceptionally accurately-focusing lens in the "normal" range, completely apart from sporting stellar performance in the macro end of things. I have absolutely no complaints regarding its focusing performance. Or anything else for that matter.

I will second Robert's observations with regard to AF on the Canon 100/2.8. It's no speed demon, but accurate as heck I don't ever hesitate to use it for normal short-tele work.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/18/2013 08:39:24 AM · #17

The USM focus can be important on a macro if you are shooting live bugs. I don't know how loud the gear mechanism is for the Tamron lens, but it may be enough to scare away your subject.