I have a question ... I own a canon eos 700d with a 18-135 lens.
I really enjoy macro shots and therefore considering
getting a macro lens.
What kinda lens do you use our can you recommend?
I heard about tamron lenses being fairly cheaper in price.
But I am not sure if they lack in quality. I am no way neat professional
I just do photography for my enjoyment.
Hi Annika, would appreciate if you could share your responses please. I have the same camera but with the canon 18-55 and 55-250mm lens. The latter lens set at 250mm focal length does quite good close-ups of my bird and flower photography but nothing like as close and as detailed as a dedicated macro lens.
The nice thing about those macro lenses (Canon 60mm or 100mm, Sigma 70mm or 105mm and Tamron 90mm) is that they are all very good lenses - fast and sharp! The newer versions have IS/VC but they tend to be a lot more expensive. Pick the one that suit your budget - you can't go wrong with any of them (I have the Sigma 70mm).
Hi Annika, I absolutely love macro, and I have to recommend the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM. While it is pricey, it is so sharp and the focus is fast and true. This was my first expensive lens, and having used it for a few years, I think it is well worth the investment. I first used it on my Canon 550D.
I got the Sigma 70mm on advice from a pro photographer friend - I had been going to get the Canon 100 2.8L. The reason for the recommendation wasn't based on price (even though the Sigma is much cheaper) - it was all about sharpness and image quality.
The Sigma is a magic lens. Super, super sharp - more so in the lab tests than the 105mm, which is why I chose it. I used it on my 700D and now on my 5D, and I have never been anything less than thrilled at the result.
Hi Annika,
I am also looking into a macro lens for a 650D. For what it is worth, according to the research on the web, the Tokina 2.8 100mm macro is an excellent lens that rivals the Canon L in every respect - except price and in some aspects exceeds it.
Does anyone have any info on the Tokina?
@helstor Must agree with Helge yet again. This is becoming a habit Helge. A nice one though. The Sigma 105 (Canon mount) is worth every penny, even though it is not inexpensive. I don't own it, but have rented it on my D7100. Ashley @kiwisnapper tells us the 70 is a good lens too. Personally, I like the longer length; you can step back a little more to have some room.
@terryliv Terry, I indeed own the Tokina 100 (Nikon mount) and for half the price of the "equivalent" Canon or even Sigma, works very nicely. It's a great standard medium telephoto too, and a superb portrait lens. Three lenses in one. As is the Sigma, or any similar "macro" prime lens. However I don't use it much any more. You saw the magic 28-300 I was shooting with last Friday, and with a very close focus distance (15 inches) works fine as a macro even out to 300mm. Like I said above, I love a long length close (or even for portraits) if the lens is sharp, gives me room to manoeuver. Two things though about the Tokina 100. It is not Image Stabilized and your camera must have a "pin" Auto Focus drive for AF to work since there is no AF motor in the lens. I don't know if the 650d or the 700d do.
HI Annika
This discussion is very timely for me too. I have a 700D with the kit lens 18-55 and 55-250 as well as a 50mm 1.8 which I am enjoying.
I will be travelling next year and am not keen to lug the 55-250mm aroundas I struggle with focus on this. So I am looking for a macro and/or a wide angle to give me more options. I have been recommended the Canon EFS 10-18mm. I would be interested to get opinions on that too. I will watch this discussion with interest.
@kiwinanna Hi Liana, I bought a Canon 10-18 just recently once again based on reviews I found on the Internet (Ken Rockwell et al).
I haven't had a chance to really try it out yet but from the practice shots I have taken, it seems fine. I'll try to find a 365 worthy practice shot that I can post for you
I use the Sigma 105 with my canon 7d. I have only had it a few months and I am loving it. I went on a wildlife photography course before I bought it and got advice from the instructor. I have used it for wilfdlife and portraits - recently on my page Skipper, Sea of Ceonothus and Bee in Clover . I am very pleased with my buy but the downside is that is rather big and heavy.
Thanks for this thread. I to have a 700d with the 18-55, 55-250 and 52 which I keep on my camera most of the time. @terryliv would also like to know how the 10-18 goes
Most macro lenses are well corrected and suited to the task. I would suggest the 100mm IS USM which is first rate but offerings from Sigma, Tamron and Tokina are excellent also and you are unlikely to notice a difference optically. IMHO focal length is far more important. Sub 100mm lenses are too short a focal length for skittish bugs if that is your thing and 180mm etc are too cumbersome and unwieldy, not fun to use handheld at all! 100mm (approx!) is the golden length for me. As a former Canon user I loved the L but vfm I think the Tokina is well worth a look. Budget for a good flash, macro is more fun with one and you can chuck the tripod and forget about the light because you brought your own.........
Edited to add that Canon do a cheaper 100mm macro that misses out on the fantastic image stabilisation of the L lens but is optically as good and a fair whack cheaper.
I have a Canon 70D and have used a Tamron 90mm, I think it was f1.8 (not positive about that though). I just borrowed it from a friend but it took great pictures and was a lot of fun!
I really appreciate all your Input soooooo much :) you guys are much better than whatever review I can find on Amazon or whichever Website!
I looked into this one now:
Canon EF-S 60mm 1:2,8 Makro USM Objektive
389,00 Euro
Canon EF 100mm/1:2,8 USM Macro Objektiv
456,00 Euro
Sigma 70 mm F2,8 EX DG Makro-Objektiv
389,00 Euro
Sigma 105 mm F2,8 EX Makro DG OS HSM-Objektiv
449,00 Euro
Could you be so kind and actually explain the main diff between those 2 for a "Hobby" photographer. Like do I really need the 100mm one?
I know you cannot name what I Need ;) but you get what I mean.
Personally I would go with one of the Sigmas. Quality wise, they seem sharper than the Canons.
And as previously mentioned, I believe the extra quality of the 70 is worth choosing that over the 105 - I have never been in a situation where I have not been able to position the lens where I need it. Plus, because it is so sharp, if you really had to you could crop slightly and still get at least as good quality as the 105.
I have the sigma 105 which I can use on either my Canon 1100D or my Canon 6D.
Before I got it I took a look at the groups for different lenses on Flickr. (I always do that when I am looking for a lens).
This was my second sigma lens and I have been really pleased with both of them.
Brand isn't important. Take an image with all these lenses and review them on a desktop. You will never tell them apart in real world use. No one has ever bought a 100mm macro and wished they had bought a 60mm but many have bought a 60 and regretted being so close to the subject. Handling is important, try them out of you can. From your list the image stabilised 105 sigma is a no brainer to be honest.
I have a canon camera. Love macros.
It depends a lot on what you are wanting to shoot. All will do the job well.
The first lens I bought when I got my canon rebel in 2004 was the 100 macro. It was my most used lens and when I went to full frame that didn't change. I upgraded to the 100 L last year. I don't think it's any better image quality wise. IS doesn't do much good for macro and I knew that going in. But because it has always been my "swiss army knife" of lenses, I purchased it because of the versatility it can offer. The IS adds to the versatility.
Its a great length for portraits as there is a little more bokeh in the background than the 60 at 2.8. and gives you a little working distance from your subject which can be helpful at times with macro or portraits. If you are looking to shoot bugs or butterflies you may need an even longer length.
I had the sigma 150 for a short time about 8 years ago. I wanted to love it and it did create great images but the focus was slow compared to the Canon. I can't vouch for the focus speed of the newer sigma macro's. Not important for macro, as macro lens seem to focus a little slower in general, but again not handy as an all purpose lens.
So if you are looking for a macro specific lens, it depends on what you are planning to photograph. If you are looking for a macro that can have other uses I would consider those uses in your selection of a lens. Just my 2 cents.
@kporte@annika82 Strongly endorse Keith's last post. The image stabilized Sigma 105 would be my choice of the lenses you list also, for its sheer versatility. "Sharpness" of the final image is almost always about technique which ultimately boils down to focus and stability. And final finishing n Photoshop or equivalent of course, but even the magic Photoshop can't correct much for bad focus or camera shake.
Image Stabilization (I think it's OS in Sigma speak) is such a blessing, hand held and in lower light. The "rule" (more guidance) for a safe hand-held speed on your camera without IS is 1/(full-frame-equivalent-focal-length) which on your Canon and 100mm is about 1/150 second.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
The Sigma is a magic lens. Super, super sharp - more so in the lab tests than the 105mm, which is why I chose it. I used it on my 700D and now on my 5D, and I have never been anything less than thrilled at the result.
I am also looking into a macro lens for a 650D. For what it is worth, according to the research on the web, the Tokina 2.8 100mm macro is an excellent lens that rivals the Canon L in every respect - except price and in some aspects exceeds it.
Does anyone have any info on the Tokina?
@terryliv Terry, I indeed own the Tokina 100 (Nikon mount) and for half the price of the "equivalent" Canon or even Sigma, works very nicely. It's a great standard medium telephoto too, and a superb portrait lens. Three lenses in one. As is the Sigma, or any similar "macro" prime lens. However I don't use it much any more. You saw the magic 28-300 I was shooting with last Friday, and with a very close focus distance (15 inches) works fine as a macro even out to 300mm. Like I said above, I love a long length close (or even for portraits) if the lens is sharp, gives me room to manoeuver. Two things though about the Tokina 100. It is not Image Stabilized and your camera must have a "pin" Auto Focus drive for AF to work since there is no AF motor in the lens. I don't know if the 650d or the 700d do.
This discussion is very timely for me too. I have a 700D with the kit lens 18-55 and 55-250 as well as a 50mm 1.8 which I am enjoying.
I will be travelling next year and am not keen to lug the 55-250mm aroundas I struggle with focus on this. So I am looking for a macro and/or a wide angle to give me more options. I have been recommended the Canon EFS 10-18mm. I would be interested to get opinions on that too. I will watch this discussion with interest.
I haven't had a chance to really try it out yet but from the practice shots I have taken, it seems fine. I'll try to find a 365 worthy practice shot that I can post for you
@terryliv would also like to know how the 10-18 goes
Edited to add that Canon do a cheaper 100mm macro that misses out on the fantastic image stabilisation of the L lens but is optically as good and a fair whack cheaper.
I really appreciate all your Input soooooo much :) you guys are much better than whatever review I can find on Amazon or whichever Website!
I looked into this one now:
Canon EF-S 60mm 1:2,8 Makro USM Objektive
389,00 Euro
Canon EF 100mm/1:2,8 USM Macro Objektiv
456,00 Euro
Sigma 70 mm F2,8 EX DG Makro-Objektiv
389,00 Euro
Sigma 105 mm F2,8 EX Makro DG OS HSM-Objektiv
449,00 Euro
Could you be so kind and actually explain the main diff between those 2 for a "Hobby" photographer. Like do I really need the 100mm one?
I know you cannot name what I Need ;) but you get what I mean.
Thanks again guys :)
And as previously mentioned, I believe the extra quality of the 70 is worth choosing that over the 105 - I have never been in a situation where I have not been able to position the lens where I need it. Plus, because it is so sharp, if you really had to you could crop slightly and still get at least as good quality as the 105.
Not to mention, it's EUR50 cheaper! :-)
Before I got it I took a look at the groups for different lenses on Flickr. (I always do that when I am looking for a lens).
This was my second sigma lens and I have been really pleased with both of them.
It depends a lot on what you are wanting to shoot. All will do the job well.
The first lens I bought when I got my canon rebel in 2004 was the 100 macro. It was my most used lens and when I went to full frame that didn't change. I upgraded to the 100 L last year. I don't think it's any better image quality wise. IS doesn't do much good for macro and I knew that going in. But because it has always been my "swiss army knife" of lenses, I purchased it because of the versatility it can offer. The IS adds to the versatility.
Its a great length for portraits as there is a little more bokeh in the background than the 60 at 2.8. and gives you a little working distance from your subject which can be helpful at times with macro or portraits. If you are looking to shoot bugs or butterflies you may need an even longer length.
I had the sigma 150 for a short time about 8 years ago. I wanted to love it and it did create great images but the focus was slow compared to the Canon. I can't vouch for the focus speed of the newer sigma macro's. Not important for macro, as macro lens seem to focus a little slower in general, but again not handy as an all purpose lens.
So if you are looking for a macro specific lens, it depends on what you are planning to photograph. If you are looking for a macro that can have other uses I would consider those uses in your selection of a lens. Just my 2 cents.
Image Stabilization (I think it's OS in Sigma speak) is such a blessing, hand held and in lower light. The "rule" (more guidance) for a safe hand-held speed on your camera without IS is 1/(full-frame-equivalent-focal-length) which on your Canon and 100mm is about 1/150 second.
I went for the Sigma 105 mm F2,8 EX Makro DG OS HSM-Objektiv and cannot wait to try it now.
THANK YOU for all your Input and advice