Advice wanted: 100mm macro lens for Canon?

[Bob_B]

I'm in the market to buy a high quality macro lens for my 7D, and would appreciate suggestions and words of wisdom. My current macro is a Canon 50mm EF-S macro, which is okay. I plan to upgrade from my 7D to a full frame sensor, probably the 5D MkIV when it comes out, so the EF-S won't be an option at that point. Also, I want the longer working distance that you get from a 100 mm or greater lens. Price range: hopefully well under $1000 US.

I would appreciate hearing back from you with your thoughts. How does the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM stack up for sharpness and field flatness?

Thank you for your reply.

Bob

[muntanela]

I am very satisfied with a Leitz R Elmarit 100 apo macro. I paid € 980 (good condition, leitaxed to Nikon ), it is also very good for landscape and it has become my standard lens.

[mlewis]

I like my Canon 100 f/2.8 L IS macro lens.

[Arlen]

I've used the Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro for years, and it is excellent. Retails for about $550. Depending on how you use it, you might want to get the newer version with IS, which sells for about $900. If I were just getting started today, I would go with the latter, as it is more versatile for hand-held, natural light work.

[Don Blauvelt]

Bob, my wife has and uses her 7D and 100mm F/2.8 with IS, 50% of the time she is shooting her Flower Photography, both in the field and in her studio. She is very pleased with the results and the weight of the combo is an additional blessing. We are currently viewing her photography on a 65" 4K TV. It looks outstanding as does her prints and canvases. This is her website:

robertalondonphotography.com

[Rainer SLP]

I use the EF 180mm f3.5 due to the fact that when shooting insects you have a longer distance to the bugs and they do not run away so easily.

[Arlen]

One other thing to keep in mind is that if you move from the 7D to a full frame camera, for a particular lens at minimum focus distance (1:1 magnification ratio), the proportion of the frame that the subject occupies will be reduced by the crop factor, 1/1.6. I don't know what the resolution of the 5D IV will be, but with the 5D III, you don't gain enough resolution over the 7D to offset that completely. This becomes important if you shoot small subjects with fine details you want to portray.

[Bob_B]

Thanks you guys. It's nice to get confirmation of the quality of Canon lenses, which I have used almost exclusively since I was in high school (and the Beatles were still together . Dxomark had nice things to say about the 100mm f/2.8, so I'm leaning towards that lens, although the extra distant afforded by the 180mm is something I'd love to have. (I too photograph a lot of nimble insects.) Given that I have to save up for this lens, and this will take me a few months at least, I have some time to mull over my decision.

   Best regards,

       Bob

[mbaginy]

Bob, I use both the Canon 180/3.5 and am very pleased.  I formerly used the Canon 100/2.8 and was also satisfied but wanted a longer focal length to lessen DoF.

I’ve noticed one thing using the 180mm: while I do achieve less DoF, the increased distance between camera and subject can present problems.  I often hold a diffusor or reflector (or both) plus the cable release.  Verifying composition and lighting can be challenging (and a downright pain) when trying to peek through the angle finder, all at the same time.

With the 100mm lens, I was often able to kneel immediately behind the camera while holding the other gear for lighting purposes.  Now I’m often position off to a side, trying to breach that extra distance.  There always seems to be a tradeoff.  I wish Canon offered a macro zoom as Nikon once did (for a short while).  I think it was a 70-140 macro zoom, or something like that.  A friend who used Nikon loved it!

What I also require is a tripod collar in order to quickly rotate from horizontal to vertical or vice versa.  I’ve heard a great deal of positive reports about the Zeiss 100 macro and would love to try it out but why they forgot (?) to add a tripod collar is beyond me.  That’s a no-go for my purposes.

[spidermike]

If you want a lens under $1,000 then the Tamorn 90m f2.8 is used by professionals as much as the Canon 100mm - and if it is good enough for them to earn their living I guess that is as good a real-world test as you can get. The downisde to that lens is that it is not internal focusing so the barrel extends, some people hate it some are OK with it. The Sigma 180mm also gets very good comments.

I have to admit I bought the Canon 100mm because I wanted the IS.

[Bob_B]

@Mike D.B. - You bring up points I had not considered. I use reflectors and speedlites routinely, so I'm going to have to reassess whether a 180 mm macro is for me. Thanks for your reply.

[NancyP]

Canon 100s, Tamron 90, Sigma 105 all get good ratings. The Canon L IS is popular as a general-use telephoto/ macro combo.Another possibility for manual focus aficionados is the new Samyang 100 f/2.8 1:1 macro, which is new enough that the reviews are scanty last time I looked. It may be good, and cheap.

Really, there are a lot of good macros out there.

The Canon 180 f/3.5L no-IS is barely a possibility used, probably just squeezes under the $1,000.00 mark. The working distance is very handy for creatures. I have slapped a 1.4x teleconverter on it and shot close-ups of venomous snakes - admittedly, ones not acting nervous. AF (which one does use with live creatures) - s-l-o-w.

The Zeiss 100 f/2 1:2 macro may also be a possibility used, if you get lucky. Manual focus, of course.

THe Sigma 150 f/2.8 1:1 macro has been a very popular and well regarded lens.

[John Koerner]

I'm in the market to buy a high quality macro lens for my 7D, and would appreciate suggestions and words of wisdom. My current macro is a Canon 50mm EF-S macro, which is okay. I plan to upgrade from my 7D to a full frame sensor, probably the 5D MkIV when it comes out, so the EF-S won't be an option at that point. Also, I want the longer working distance that you get from a 100 mm or greater lens. Price range: hopefully well under $1000 US.

I would appreciate hearing back from you with your thoughts. How does the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM stack up for sharpness and field flatness?

Thank you for your reply.

Bob

In order to answer the question, what do you shoot mostly?

Do you hand hold or use a tripod?

[Bob_B]

What do I shoot the most? It's pretty evenly divided between small insects and spiders, and botanical subjects (flowers, insectivorous plants, fungi), although I have shot watches, jewelery, etc. During the warm weather months, I mostly hand-hold for macro work outdoors, but it depends on the subject and working conditions. (As required, I use carbon-fiber series 6 tripod, and RRS ballhead and macrofocusing rails when using a tripod, along with yongnuo speeds lites and a host of reflectors and light benders.) When indoors, I use the tripod almost exclusively. I hope that answers your question, and thanks for your reply.

[NancyP]

The IS / OS / VC isn't a perfect fix for hand-holding at high magnification, but helps some. I think that you will want to use a Canon 100 f/2.8 L IS or Sigma 105 f/2.8 OS etc, or Tamron 90mm f/2.8 VC macro lens.

[Bob_B]

The IS / OS / VC isn't a perfect fix for hand-holding at high magnification, but helps some. I think that you will want to use a Canon 100 f/2.8 L IS or Sigma 105 f/2.8 OS etc, or Tamron 90mm f/2.8 VC macro lens.

Yes, I agree with you, those are the best suited lenses for my needs and price range.

[muntanela]

What I also require is a tripod collar in order to quickly rotate from horizontal to vertical or vice versa.  I’ve heard a great deal of positive reports about the Zeiss 100 macro and would love to try it out but why they forgot (?) to add a tripod collar is beyond me.  That’s a no-go for my purposes.

With an L-bracket you can easily rotate a 100mm lens. It is even better (safer) than a tripod collar, this lens weighs less than a camera body.

[John Koerner]

What do I shoot the most? It's pretty evenly divided between small insects and spiders, and botanical subjects (flowers, insectivorous plants, fungi), although I have shot watches, jewelery, etc. During the warm weather months, I mostly hand-hold for macro work outdoors, but it depends on the subject and working conditions. (As required, I use carbon-fiber series 6 tripod, and RRS ballhead and macrofocusing rails when using a tripod, along with yongnuo speeds lites and a host of reflectors and light benders.) When indoors, I use the tripod almost exclusively. I hope that answers your question, and thanks for your reply.

Hi.

If you're split between handheld and tripod outdoors in summer, and if you use a tripod exclusively in-studio, then you're using a tripod about 75% of the time (which is my preference also).

That said, if the primary reason you're switching from 50mm to 100mm is for more "reach," this is also the primary reason I left 100mms behind years ago and went to the Canon 180mm. It simply produces better images.

I have owned the Canon 100, the Canon 100L, and the Canon 180L ... and have ditched them all in favor of the new Sigma 180mm f/2.8 APO Macro EX DG OS HSM.

Since you're using a tripod 75% of the time, it comes with a tripod collar ... and for the 25% of the time you hand-hold it also has a great IS system.

It is sharper than any Canon, has a better bokeh than even the new 100L, has IS like the 100L, faster AF than the 180, and it has a stackable lens hood system that is pretty nifty.

If I were you, I would forget about 100s altogether (for the same reason I did: REACH), and stretch your wallet out $700, and get the 180mm Sigma.

It does everything the 2 best Canon lenses do (f/2.8/IS/bokeh of the 100mm + the reach of the 180mm) ... and does them better.

Jack

[NancyP]

Concerning the 180mm macro of whatever maker - you have a substantially longer working distance - good for insects poisonous and other snakes, and nice narrow angle of view/ maximum bokehliciousness -  maybe a PITA if you have not a lot of available working distance in a studio for close-ups in the 1:5 to 1:2 (or use on a copy stand or to shoot artwork with a flat-field lens), or if you are in a field and have to pull all the interfering grass stems out of the way and keep them pinned back to get a clear shot of your subject. Yes, I have been shooting prairie wildflowers recently. 

[telyt]

With an L-bracket you can easily rotate a 100mm lens. It is even better (safer) than a tripod collar, this lens weighs less than a camera body.

A rotating tripod collar does not shift the camera up, down or sideways.  Much easier to work with @ macro distances when changing between vertical & horizontal.