Would like to start doing some macro shooting. The two lenses I am interested in are the 100mm macro L and 180 macro L. Do want to do dragon and dasel flies etc as well as flowers. I realize that the 180 would probably be best for the insect type shots. But don't know about flowers etc. Also was thinking of using the 100mm as a portrait lense as well as macro. I can add a 1.4 tele convertor to the 100mm and be close to the 180mm. So any advice would be appreciated especially if you have or are using these lenses. I shot full frame body.
Thank Tony
PS if you have any other 3rd party lenses you feel are the quality of the Canon let me know.
Sigma / Tamron 180mm macros are reported to be every bit as good (or better) optically as the L. Sigma has the ultrasonic motor as well. There's also a new faster, stabilized 180mm Sigma (but it's more bulky and probably more expensive). Don't forget the highly regarded Sigma 150mm f/2.8 lenses (the newer one is stabilized).
In the 90-105mm class, there are even more opportunities. I wouldn't recommend the older Sigma 105mm - I tried it but was turned off by the focusing (AF was extremely slow and hesitant - and that on a 1D series body! - and MF was very scratchy and stiff). The newer Sigma 105mm and Tamron 90mm lenses are equipped with both image stabilizers and ultrasonic motors, and therefore highly advisable. The cheapest option is the Tokina 100mm - it's reported to be optically excellent but has no stabilizer and old AF mechanism.
tony rizzo wrote:
I can add a 1.4 tele convertor to the 100mm and be close to the 180mm.
FYI, the current Canon Mk III extenders are not compatible with the 100 f2.8L IS macro. I can't remember if the older versions work or not; otherwise you would need to look at a third-part teleconverter.
tony rizzo wrote:
I can add a 1.4 tele convertor to the 100mm and be close to the 180mm.
molson wrote:
FYI, the current Canon Mk III extenders are not compatible with the 100 f2.8L IS macro. I can't remember if the older versions work or not; otherwise you would need to look at a third-part teleconverter.
True. The EF 100/2.8 Macro USM couldn't use an extender, either. The shortest Canon prime that's compatible with Canon Extenders is the 135/2L*. The Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 DG/DGX 1.4x TC should work just fine.
Kenko extenders will work with both Canon 100 macro lenses
I loved the Tamron 180, but only for MF. It's AF was a dog, accurate, but extremely slow and uncertain. The worst I've experienced. IQ was every it as good as the Canon.
You will need a third party tele-extender for the macros.
Get the 180 macro L for the flies.
Don't overlook the 100-400 L with extension tubes for flies. Lots of flexibility and gives you an outstanding lens for other purposes too. About the same cost as the 180 L and you get IS included. It has a decent minimum focus distance, which will be closer with extension tubes.
Get an 85 f/1.8 for portraits, if you mean head-and-shoulder portraits. The 100 mm (or 100-400 at 100) would be fine for those too, but the 85 is less expensive and about as sharp and faster (shallower depth of field if that is important to you, though it is often over-done).
Not stated was your camera body. Full-frame or crop? Makes a difference. Use 50 mm for head-and-shoulders on crop factor.
I own the 100mm L IS, Sigma 150mm f2.8 OS, and the MP-E 65mm macro lenses. For insects and ultra-small stuff, nothing comes close to the MP-E, for versatility, nothing comes close to the 100L, since the AF is ultra-fast and precise, and the hybrid IS is really helpful, both in nat light macros and in general/close-up shooting. For skittish, "long range" insects, like butterflies and dragonflies, the Sigma 150mm is nice, since it takes a teleconverter very well (unlike the 100mm, see above), and has a long working distance.
I have the 100L IS (and the shorter EF 50/2.5 and EF-S 60/2.8) and it is one of my favorite lenses for general photography. It is amazing for portrait for fine detail (you can "dumb-down" in PP if you want softer).
I don't see how you can go wrong with the 100L IS.
molson wrote:
FYI, the current Canon Mk III extenders are not compatible with the 100 f2.8L IS macro. I can't remember if the older versions work or not; otherwise you would need to look at a third-part teleconverter.
molson wrote:
FYI, the current Canon Mk III extenders are not compatible with the 100 f2.8L IS macro. I can't remember if the older versions work or not; otherwise you would need to look at a third-part teleconverter.
Correct - and won't work with the previous 100 f/2.8 either.
With this lens, I use a 12 mm extension ring between the lens and 2X to keep the two from "colliding".
Imagemaster wrote:
TC's are designed specifically to work best on telephoto lenses, not macro lenses.
That doesn't mean they won't work well in conjunction with some Macro lenses...in fact my go-to macro setup consists of a Sigma 150 and a 1.4x TC with or without extension tubes. This combo does well for damsels, flowers and nearly everything in between and outside. Personally, I would go with the 100L or the Sigma 150, be it the OS or non-OS version.
If you don't mind manual focus and not quite 1:1 reproduction, the Zeiss ZE 100 makro-planar is a great choice with stellar Zeiss micro-contrast. It's also the fastest macro lens you'll find, and does superb double duty as a portrait lens.
I recommend on FF camera the Sigma 150/2.8 macro lens (even the old version is fantastic!). On par with Canon macro lenses.
I also like Canon's old EF version 100/2.8 macro lens. You can get it now for a good price in the used market. The Sigma 105/2.8 macro is also a very good lens, but its AF system is outdated (you might not need AF for macro).
Imagemaster wrote:
TC's are designed specifically to work best on telephoto lenses, not macro lenses.
The 1.4x II teleconverter II works perfectly for macro. You just need to use a Kenko extension tube between teleconverter and lens, and you increase the magnification by a bit. I used this setup with all my macro lenses and also with my 70-200 and 100-400 lenses for close-ups. It always works well.
retrofocus wrote:
The 1.4x II teleconverter II works perfectly for macro. You just need to use a Kenko extension tube between teleconverter and lens, and you increase the magnification by a bit. I used this setup with all my macro lenses and also with my 70-200 and 100-400 lenses for close-ups. It always works well.
Just get the Kenko Pro 300DGX 1.4x TC and you won't need to worry about tubes and you of course gain 40% more magnification.
Sigma 150 f/2.8 macro + 1.4x + 7D is a great combo for things like dragons and damsels. Another excellent lens for that is 300 f/4 (IS) with 1.4x TC as that gets you to about 0.35x, great for full body portraits.
I've owned both and both are great... i kept the 180L the longest because, for me, it gave me the best color and the buttery bokeh that i love. It was also great for distance shooting (I shoot hand held) The only draw back to the 180L (even the 100L) is its weight... so now I just shoot with the light 60mm 2.8 EF-S and im happy (somewhat) haha... happy macro shooting
