Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM vs Tamron SP Autofocus 90mm f/2.8 DI Macro Lens

[hwchoy]

mainly I prefer the canon for the internal focusing mechanism. FTM is very important too (in those rare moments when I use AF) but I'm not sure if the others do not have this capability. for me "value for money" is secondary to "this is the feature I truly wanted".

 

[Klose]

Depends what kind of macros you shoot. If insects, I would say get the canon one - silent and internal focusing. If flowers and other stuff, the other 2 should be good enough

 

[yehosaphat]

They say the closer you are to your subject using a flash when taking macro, the softer will be the lighting in result.

1) Is that true?
2) Do you always use flash when taking your macro shots? What is the rule of thumb in whether to use or not to use flash? :think:

 

[mpenza]

They say the closer you are to your subject using a flash when taking macro, the softer will be the lighting in result.

1) Is that true?
2) Do you always use flash when taking your macro shots? What is the rule of thumb in whether to use or not to use flash? :think:

Who say? Lighting will generally be harsh if you fire direct. Use of some accessories/bouncing surface will reduce the harshness.

 

[thw]

They say the closer you are to your subject using a flash when taking macro, the softer will be the lighting in result.
1) Is that true?
2) Do you always use flash when taking your macro shots? What is the rule of thumb in whether to use or not to use flash? :think:

1) Definitely false. Flash is harsh when subject is close. You need a diffuser of sorts.

2) Yes. You want a deep DOF as well as short exposure time (to eliminate handshake). Flash helps to prevent underexposure.

 

[Denosha]

Moving the flash off the camera hotshoe also helps, to prevent nasty shadows from appearing directly behind the subject. If used correctly, you shouldn't really be able to tell if a flash was used (except for maybe black backgrounds and highlights on shinier subjects). Like this (oh yeah, and this was taken with the Canon 100mm macro).

 

[jdredd]

id get the tamron... optical quality > build quality for me. and i can live without USM. money i save can go towards my 50mm 1.4....

 

[yehosaphat]

Moving the flash off the camera hotshoe also helps, to prevent nasty shadows from appearing directly behind the subject. If used correctly, you shouldn't really be able to tell if a flash was used (except for maybe black backgrounds and highlights on shinier subjects). Like this (oh yeah, and this was taken with the Canon 100mm macro).

Thanks for sharing denosha... did you use a off camera flash or the built in flash for the shot you shared.

 

[hwchoy]

hard to use the built-in flash, or even a mounted flash because of the length of the barrel and short working distance. when I use a mounted flash, I would bounce it off a white card over the subject.

 

[yehosaphat]

huh... so must always use macro flash or the off camera flash all the time?? How many actually does that??

 

[hwchoy]

doesn't matter how, just get light onto your subject. however some times it is necessary to throw directional light even under bright daylight (e.g. during noon) to give dimensionality to your subject.

 

[Denosha]

Thanks for sharing denosha... did you use a off camera flash or the built in flash for the shot you shared.

That was with a 580EX flash with bounce card firing as a wireless master with a Sigma 500DG Super slave flash with omnibounce firing from an off-camera flash bracket (with a mini ballhead to allow the flash to positioned). Abit extreme but works better than a ringflash (with tends to give very flat lighting). My macros are entirely dependent on the flash(es) for light. If they don't go off I basically get a black frame. :bsmilie:

 

[Zplus]

Putting macro aside, what if the comparison instead is between the Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 and the Canon 85mm f/1.8. The price is almost the same for these 2.

I'm trying to decide between a longer prime and a telezoom.

Canon 85mm f1.8 will be better for non macros. This is because:
1) USM is fast
2) Focus range is not as much as the Tamron and so it hunts less.
3) It does not extend.


But if you want a closeup shot of someone's eye, the Tamron SP90mm would do nicely. Just have to warn your model that the lens will extend... dont want her to get a black eye....


Other then that, the Tamron SP 90mm is a very good macro lens. On my canon bodies, the focus is spot on. Very sharp images and contrasty colors. Its downside is that it extends. Canon 100mm macro is internal focus and does not extend. But the price is also higher. In the end, I ended up using a Tamron SP90mm. Also have a Canon 85mm too.

 

[yehosaphat]

That was with a 580EX flash with bounce card firing as a wireless master with a Sigma 500DG Super slave flash with omnibounce firing from an off-camera flash bracket (with a mini ballhead to allow the flash to positioned). Abit extreme but works better than a ringflash (with tends to give very flat lighting). My macros are entirely dependent on the flash(es) for light. If they don't go off I basically get a black frame. :bsmilie:

:sweat: all that to take a macro shot!?

Ok maybe I should ask... under wat circumstances do you not need to use a flash?

 

[hwchoy]

actually macro is not particularly simple to shoot, the short working distance and shallow DOF creates challenges not seen in "normal" shoots. lighting your subject adequately is a huge problem.

 

[mutabor]

Guy,
just out of topic question. I'm about to get Canon EF 100mm f/2.8. I never had dedicated macro lens before. So the question is - do you guys use CP filter with macro lens?

 

[Denosha]

You'd probably only not need to use a flash if you take your pics with longer exposures and a tripod but with insects, as you can imagine, that can be quite difficult.

You don't need a CP filter with your macro lens unless you have some special reason to, like you're shooting something under the surface of the water and need to remove the reflections or something. Btw, the Canon 100mm macro doesn't come with a hood which i think is actually quite important. For the few times i shot without a hood, my UV filter always got quite dirty due to the "harsher" working conditions.

 

[mpenza]

Guy,
just out of topic question. I'm about to get Canon EF 100mm f/2.8. I never had dedicated macro lens before. So the question is - do you guys use CP filter with macro lens?

CP might be useful for to cutdown on reflection for reflective subjects/background. otherwise, probably no.

 

[mutabor]

Btw, the Canon 100mm macro doesn't come with a hood which i think is actually quite important. For the few times i shot without a hood, my UV filter always got quite dirty due to the "harsher" working conditions.

Yep most of the review I've read mention that a lens hoods is a must have.

Btw I just received a price quote from Cathay for the 100mm macro lens - S$965.00 + 5% GST.

 

[yehosaphat]

You'd probably only not need to use a flash if you take your pics with longer exposures and a tripod but with insects, as you can imagine, that can be quite difficult.

You don't need a CP filter with your macro lens unless you have some special reason to, like you're shooting something under the surface of the water and need to remove the reflections or something. Btw, the Canon 100mm macro doesn't come with a hood which i think is actually quite important. For the few times i shot without a hood, my UV filter always got quite dirty due to the "harsher" working conditions.

Longer exposure like how long? Looked up some macro shots and their EXIF... usually shutter is 1/200 and high f stops like f11 to f14. Does that mean that this setup is usually with flash taken?