100mm or 180mm macro?

"Musty" <musty RemoveThis @nospam.net> wrote in message
news:TN1me.13195$6g3.5110@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> All,
>
> I would like to add a macro lens to my "arsenal". There are many choices
> (Canon, Tamron, Sigma). I shoot with a 20D so I have the 62% cropping.
>
> Now, all the lens makers seem to make 100mm f2.8 and 180mm f3.5
>
> Can anyone tell me under what application one might go for the 180mm? I
> noticed that Canon only make the 180mm as the "L". I also found that
> Tamron
> have a just as good 180mm for about half the price.
>
> It seems to me that 180mm is more useful since you can get more close-up
> shots. Does the 1.6x crop factor steer me more towards the 100mm?
>
> My goal for this lens is shooting bugs and flowers and droplets of water
> etc.

You should also consider the Sigma 150mm 2.8.

--
rda
www.rdaphoto.co.uk
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne.RemoveThis@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:d7af0o$sak$1@inews.gazeta.pl...

>
> Having said all that ... scout around for a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro. It
> is very good a macro, and is very good at portraits as well, given the FL
> and smooth out-of-focus characteristics.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan
>

Would you put the 90mm Tamron as better than the Canon 100mm f2.8? The
Tamron sells for $480 @ B&H and has a $40 rebate. Looks like a real nice
piece of hardware.

Also, I like the idea of doing hand-held macro-shots, so perphaps the 180's
are not for me right now...

Thanks
Musty.
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

"Musty" <musty.DeleteThis@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:Dg7me.6978$j51.6651@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne.DeleteThis@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:d7af0o$sak$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
>>
>> Having said all that ... scout around for a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro. It
>> is very good a macro, and is very good at portraits as well, given the FL
>> and smooth out-of-focus characteristics.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Alan
>>
>
> Would you put the 90mm Tamron as better than the Canon 100mm f2.8? The
> Tamron sells for $480 @ B&H and has a $40 rebate. Looks like a real nice
> piece of hardware.
>
> Also, I like the idea of doing hand-held macro-shots, so perphaps the
> 180's are not for me right now...
>
> Thanks
> Musty.
>

I have looked at the Canon 100mm and own the Tamron 90mm, infact I have
owned one in one form or another for about 20 years.

I do not think that the Canon 100mm is really worth the extra dollars and it
is a bit more bulky.

Greg
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

"grenner" <regencytr1.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:119i6rr477othda@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Musty" <musty.TakeThisOut@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:Dg7me.6978$j51.6651@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> >
> > "Alan Browne" <alan.browne.TakeThisOut@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> > news:d7af0o$sak$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> >
> >>
> >> Having said all that ... scout around for a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro.
It
> >> is very good a macro, and is very good at portraits as well, given the
FL
> >> and smooth out-of-focus characteristics.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Alan
> >>
> >
> > Would you put the 90mm Tamron as better than the Canon 100mm f2.8? The
> > Tamron sells for $480 @ B&H and has a $40 rebate. Looks like a real nice
> > piece of hardware.
> >
> > Also, I like the idea of doing hand-held macro-shots, so perphaps the
> > 180's are not for me right now...
> >
> > Thanks
> > Musty.
> >
>
> I have looked at the Canon 100mm and own the Tamron 90mm, infact I have
> owned one in one form or another for about 20 years.
>
> I do not think that the Canon 100mm is really worth the extra dollars and
it
> is a bit more bulky.
>
> Greg
>

Right now, I will most likely get the Tamron and not just because it looks
better .... but it really does look better...
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

Musty wrote

>Right now, I will most likely get the Tamron and not just because it looks
>better .... but it really does look better...

Unless the Tamron has changed (again) since I tried it about six months
ago it doesn't have full-time manual focusing (the Canon does) and a
clutch mechanism (against Canon's switch). The lenses handle so
differently that you really ought to try them both before buying.

--
Hil
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

"Hils" <hils DeleteThis @nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:M0GvxWAVjSmCFwAk@newearth.demon.co.uk...
> Musty wrote
>
> >Right now, I will most likely get the Tamron and not just because it
looks
> >better .... but it really does look better...
>
> Unless the Tamron has changed (again) since I tried it about six months
> ago it doesn't have full-time manual focusing (the Canon does) and a
> clutch mechanism (against Canon's switch). The lenses handle so
> differently that you really ought to try them both before buying.
>
> --
> Hil

Is it also true that this lens (barrel) actually moves externally while
focusing?

Musty.
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

"Musty" <musty RemoveThis @nospam.net> wrote in message
news:TN1me.13195$6g3.5110@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> All,
>
> I would like to add a macro lens to my "arsenal". There are many choices
> (Canon, Tamron, Sigma). I shoot with a 20D so I have the 62% cropping.
>
> Now, all the lens makers seem to make 100mm f2.8 and 180mm f3.5
>
> Can anyone tell me under what application one might go for the 180mm? I
> noticed that Canon only make the 180mm as the "L". I also found that
> Tamron
> have a just as good 180mm for about half the price.
>
> It seems to me that 180mm is more useful since you can get more close-up
> shots. Does the 1.6x crop factor steer me more towards the 100mm?
>
> My goal for this lens is shooting bugs and flowers and droplets of water
> etc.
>
> Thanks
> Musty.
>
>

I have the 100mm Canon and am very happy with it. A nice thing is you can
use the 20D internal flash with it and get f22 iso 100 at higher
magnifications.

The advatage of the 180mm is in working distance for nervous bugs and , in
the case of the Canon version, being able to use the Canon converters with
it (to get 2X mag at a good working distance)

I went for the 100mm as it doubles as a useful general photography lens and
I can manage ambient light shots of flowers with it.

I would'nt preclude getting the 180mm Canon in the future, though. But I see
this as a more specialist lens.

Lester
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

In message <d7af0o$sak$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Alan Browne <alan.browne RemoveThis @FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Having said all that ... scout around for a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro. It
>is very good a macro, and is very good at portraits as well, given the
>FL and smooth out-of-focus characteristics.

It also out-resolves DSLR sensors with the Tamron SP 2x converter
(that's how sharp the new Di version is). All you lose is some light,
as an effective 180mm f/5.6 2:1 macro. Of course, if you really do the
2:1 with it, you'll want a shutter speed of at least 1/640 to 1/1000, or
flash.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS RemoveThis @no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

In message <B6ame.6991$PR6.1860@tornado.texas.rr.com>,
"Musty" <musty.DeleteThis@nospam.net> wrote:

>
>"Hils" <hils.DeleteThis@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:M0GvxWAVjSmCFwAk@newearth.demon.co.uk...
>> Musty wrote
>>
>> >Right now, I will most likely get the Tamron and not just because it
>looks
>> >better .... but it really does look better...
>>
>> Unless the Tamron has changed (again) since I tried it about six months
>> ago it doesn't have full-time manual focusing (the Canon does) and a
>> clutch mechanism (against Canon's switch). The lenses handle so
>> differently that you really ought to try them both before buying.
>>
>> --
>> Hil
>
>Is it also true that this lens (barrel) actually moves externally while
>focusing?

Yes, but the lens sits so far from the subject, that you won't bump into
it.

--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS.DeleteThis@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

I don't know about the Tamron, which was also redesigned fairly recently,
but the latest Canon 100/2.8 macro is entirely internal focusing. The front
element does not rotate and the length of the lens does not change, and of
course it's also USM, which allows you to use custom function 4 to shift AF
to the AE lock button. I find that really useful as most often I wouldn't
use AF for macro work but it is handy when using the lens at longer
distances.

Geoff Bryant
www.cfgphoto.com

"Musty" <musty.TakeThisOut@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:B6ame.6991$PR6.1860@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>
> "Hils" <hils.TakeThisOut@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:M0GvxWAVjSmCFwAk@newearth.demon.co.uk...
>> Musty wrote
>>
>> >Right now, I will most likely get the Tamron and not just because it
> looks
>> >better .... but it really does look better...
>>
>> Unless the Tamron has changed (again) since I tried it about six months
>> ago it doesn't have full-time manual focusing (the Canon does) and a
>> clutch mechanism (against Canon's switch). The lenses handle so
>> differently that you really ought to try them both before buying.
>>
>> --
>> Hil
>
> Is it also true that this lens (barrel) actually moves externally while
> focusing?
>
> Musty.
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro? 

In message <429accbf$0$16431$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,
"Lester Wareham" <nospam DeleteThis @please.co.uk> wrote:

>Zooms will always tend to have poor quality of out of focus areas. One
>measure of this Bokeh is said to be the ratio between the ratio between
>sagittal and meriodional MTF which tends to be large for zooms.

The Canon 100-400L has a big difference there. Things that are truly in
the background or foreground are fairly smooth, but twigs that are
crossing each other, for instance, in the fringe areas just outside the
DOF, can look a bit weird.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS DeleteThis @no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 >> Stay informed about: 100mm or 180mm macro?