It's been my favorite lens since I first bought it shortly after it was introduced.
A very versatile lens for macro and many other uses and skibum5 lists it's
attributes accurately and I've never heard anyone report they had a 'bad cop.
20 to 30 to 40D and it keeps getting better?
Next time when going to a zoo, gotta remember to take the 60 f/2.8 on my camera.
If distance to a target is not excessive, the little lens will get you results....flowers, macro, BIF, portraits, candids....you name it.
Beautiful flower, Robert, I like how all the little hairs are standing on end. I bought a Canon 50mm 2.5 macro for the 1DSII, anybody know how it compares to the 60mm?
Jeanette: It's really a pretty good lens but only 1:2 not a true 1:1 w/o the life size convertor. On the plus side, it's not limited
to 1.6 crop use as is the EF-S 60 f2.8
jkermani wrote:
Beautiful flower, Robert, I like how all the little hairs are standing on end. I bought a Canon 50mm 2.5 macro for the 1DSII, anybody know how it compares to the 60mm?
Jeanette
I found myself trying to do macro shots with my 135L so finally went out and got a smoking deal on a lightly used Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro. It of course does 1:1 and lets me reach out to critters and bugs that don't want me near them. Results on the FF 1Ds are mind boggling. Film at 11:00.
The AF drive speed is similar in 60 and 100 macro lenses, on the upper end of their FL range. They both allow excellent AF on very fast targets even in very poor light conditions like in the images below.
The key differences are:
* My 60 is sharper than my 100, but that's largely academic...they are both plenty sharp.
* Any application differences between them are consistent with the difference in FL.
For example, I use the 60 as a very dependable walk around prime. The 100 is obviously better for birds, etc..
The 60 macro is my only crop lens that I kept. I just can't sell it- I love its small size, and it is excellent for portraits and of course macro. I think as long as I have a crop body, I will keep it.
I've been sitting on the fence regarding purchasing the 60 and doing some Macro work and you may have just pushed me off, not that it ever takes more than a nudge to buy more gear
I'm past worrying about the future and EF-S. I pulled the string on buying into Canon with the 20D when the 10-22 mm filled the gap in the UWA range for crop cameras. When upgrading from my 20D I debated whether to jump to FF with 5DMkII but opted for a 50D in part because I love shooting with my 10-20mm EF-S on the wide end and 70-200mm IS on the long end. Moving to FF would have required replacing the 10-22 and buying something longer to get the same reach. Also since I don't make huge prints the difference of 15 vs 21 MP wasn't big consideration for me. 21MP files would just mean slower processing and more storage space needed with no net gain for me (YMMV).
jrscls wrote:
The 60 macro is my only crop lens that I kept. I just can't sell it- I love its small size, and it is excellent for portraits and of course macro. I think as long as I have a crop body, I will keep it.
I'm in the same boat. Amazing little lens, easily equals any of my L's....
I agree with the general sentiment expressed in this thread - a few months ago, I purchased a 60 EF-S and I'm very impressed. The image quality is outstanding. I once owned a 100/2.8 USM but I disliked the size - with the hood on it was a bit too large to fit in my favorite carry-everywhere camera bag. I keep the hood on the 60mm all the time, and I really appreciate the compact size and light weight. This lens is a joy to use in the field. I recently purchased a 5D2, but the 40D will continue to see a lot of use with the 60.
I have yet to try BIF photography , but here are some early returns with the 60 EF-S:
