Canon EOS macro lens choice

wrote in message
...
So the choice is the EF f/2.8 100mm macro (to half life size) ... OR

EF-S f/2.8 60 mm macro OR (possibly)

EF f/2.5 50 mm macro


**IF** I were not drooling for the 5D Mk II I'd buy, no quibble, the
60 mm EF-S. But I AM so drooling. I'm in no terrible hurry for it to
appear.
The EF-S won;t work on a full frame camera, so I'm still considering
forking
over for the 100mm. But 100mm is really too long for use as a "standard"
lens on the 30D. The 60 mm is not, though it really is a tele on that
camera.

I have the 50, 60 and 100mm Canon macros and have used all three extensivly.
You could also save a few bucks and look for a used EF 100mm 1:2.8 macro
(non usm).

Anyway the 50 is extremely good and amazingly sharp, however it does extend
when focusing. The 60 and 100 USM do not have external moving parts during
focusing.

The EF-S 60mm macro has quite a large image circle. If you mount it on an
EF 12 II extension tube, it will mount of the 5D. I've taken some nice
Velvia slides with it on my Elan IIe film camera. There was no vignetting
and the lens worked fully. Of course it doesn't have infinity focus this
way. Magnification varies from 0.2 to 1.28 with a 12mm tube and 0.44 to
1.61 with a 25mm tube. The version II tubes are needed for EF-S lenses and
allow them to be mounted on full frame.

The 100mm USM macro is a superb lens and can take a tripod ring too which
allows rotating the camera about the lens axis for easily switching between
horizontal and vertical formats without having to realign the camera to the
subject.

The 50 is the lightest and smallest which may be an issue for you.

I prefer the 60mm to the 100 oftentimes because by getting closer, you get a
more dramatic perspective. Bugs look more interesting very close. The
100mm forces you to be a bit further away which produces a more normal
looking view which isn't as exciting since it is more common. The 50 is
good this way too for getting close. If you don't want to scare the bugs
with the focusing on the 50, then preset the magnification and move the
camera to focus.

More working distance isn't always an improvement. Choose the focal length
based on the field of view and distance that you want to get the kind of
pictures that you enjoy looking at.

default wrote:


The 100mm USM macro is a superb lens and can take a tripod ring too which
allows rotating the camera about the lens axis for easily switching between
horizontal and vertical formats without having to realign the camera to the
subject.

The 50 is the lightest and smallest which may be an issue for you.



It was an issue, but I have finally decided on the 100. The weight is an
issue, but so is my craving for a full-frame lens (focused at infinity).
Cost is less a concern.

My 24-105 f/4L is a wonderful lens ... at infinity. As a macro
it suffers from a blue flare.

It will be nice having f/1.7 at 50 mm and f/2.8 at 100 mm
in pin-sharp lenses, though having IS would be nice too.
IS at macro range sounds iffy since lateral movement would
matter as well as angular.

Doug McDonald

wrote in message
...
It was an issue, but I have finally decided on the 100. The weight is an
issue, but so is my craving for a full-frame lens (focused at infinity).
Cost is less a concern.

My 24-105 f/4L is a wonderful lens ... at infinity. As a macro
it suffers from a blue flare.

It will be nice having f/1.7 at 50 mm and f/2.8 at 100 mm
in pin-sharp lenses, though having IS would be nice too.
IS at macro range sounds iffy since lateral movement would
matter as well as angular.



The 100mm f/2.8 is really good from 1:1 to infinity. The 50mm f/2.5 is full
frame as well but not as versatile and needs the life-size converter or a
25mm extension tube to get to 1:1. I personally like the shorter lenses and
getting closer for a more "in your face" kind of perspective but you will
get more keepers with a longer lens. Often I scare away the bugs with the
short lenses. You might prefer less dramatic, more environmental type shots
anyway.

IS would only help a little for hand-held photography since it doesn't do
much to help lateral motion. Axial motion is an even bigger problem, where
your shake bring you closer and further from the subject. You can see the
plane of best focus moving in the viewfinder. Sometimes AI servo focus can
correct this motion if you aren't moving too fast. IS also works by
decentering so I wonder if it affects sharpness too when near the limits of
its excursion.

It also works to watch the image on the ground glass carefully and press the
shutter just as the focus is where you want it. The flash freezes motion
anyway so the main thing is to get the plane of best focus right where you
want it and a small enough aperture to get the required depth of field.
F/14-22 is often needed for bugs. Flowers sometimes need up to f/32. Flat
subjects like coins, stamps, photographs etc. can be f/8.

Sometimes you see the 50mm f/2.5 going cheap in the newspaper since short
macro lenses are not very desirable anymore and that lens is very old. Some
copies date back to 1987. Pick one up in the future when you see one for
half of the new price and enjoy the 100mm now.

One thing about the 100mm macro is that it takes a very deep hood (ET-67)
that will often prevent getting close enough for 1:1. If you want to take
macro shots but still use a hood, the ET-67B for the EF-S 60mm will also fit
the 100mm macro (and vice versa) but it is plenty short enough to still use
at 1:1 assuming that your light source won't be blocked.