EF 50 1.4 USM or EF 85 1.8 USM or EF 100 2.8 Macro USM
- Thread starter rayms
- Start date
- Status
ahbian
Senior Member
100mm soft? Thats quite unusual.
Anyway, to TS, don't be decieved by the fixed focal length of the 100mm, the types of pictures are only limited by your imagination.
charlesleong
New Member
macros aren't supposed to be soft. they're supposed to be amongst the sharpest lenses...
maybe yours has a calibration issue?
I suspect so.
I will check it out soon when I have time.
Will post pictures taken on a 100mm macro for you guys to judge
:thumbsup:
It really depends what you like, to me i think your set up is already very comphrensive already. Depends if you like portrait (50 1.4 / 85 1.8) , or macro with a little bit of potrait characteristic (100 macro).
Consider if you really need so many lens, you will regret having too many over lap and not wanting to bring too many lens out :bigeyes:
Consider if you really need so many lens, you will regret having too many over lap and not wanting to bring too many lens out :bigeyes:
I think I will go for the macro lens. Should it be the 60 or 100 or others? You are right, for portrait, I can already use my current system. Will just add a macro lens (I realised this morning that I like taking macros, so might as well get a nice one and if it also happens to be a good portrait lens then perfect). Please recommend. Thanks.
Since you are a canon-er i would recommend you to get its 100mm house model. Its somewhere between the 60 and the 180 model, it gives a working distant of 15mm +/- from the front element which is quite alright for me, for handheld its weigh is only 600+/- which is quite reasonable :sweatsm:
Another thing is that its a EF lens, means its compatibile with FF, if not, it is said that since non full frame sensor uses only the center portion of the lens, issues of vinegtting will be minimum and it will be using the "sweet spot" of the lens.
Its USM allow faster focus,( but i think i would prefer manual for macro) , but it opens opportunity for like potrait or snap shot beyond macro.
It is full-time-manual, means you can tweak the focus even when in auto focus, thus enable you to use auto for lesser manification objects.
Lastly, it has internal focus, thus the framing will not be affecting when you focus on the subject, and least your front element wont risk knocking your subject :thumbsup:
Another comparable lens would tameron's version, you can check its stats from online.
But once again i would recommend to go in-house brand! You can never be wrong :bsmilie:
Frankly 100mm will be a little far for cropped senor as it becomes 160mm, so some may prefer 60mm cause it will be around 96
kirkchua79
New Member
10-22 for landscape durin travelling??
Perhaps you should start on a new thread?
Anyway, you should do some researching on the web or give the lens a try, see if too wide for you.
Theorically, the comments on the web says this lens has quite a good optics, on par with some L lens optics . So if you really need a UWA lens you can consider this house brand model.
Personally for me (although i dont have the lens) I think unless you are heading to the super scenic places , for travelling ( I take it as you mean walk-about lens) , I think 17-55 shd be quite good, not too wide nor too long. Cause to me i find it hard to use the 10-22 too oftenly, making it a little unjustifiable for the cost if its like only on my camera 10% of the time.
Perhaps you can try drop the mentality that UWA are for landscape . In many case i find telephoto lens better as they can have a tighter framing for the subject :gbounce:
ahbian
Senior Member
It depends on your macro subjects, are you doing still life, or insects and bugs.
For still life, you might wish to get the 60mm if you can't afford a larger working space.
For the insects and bugs, it is better to get the 100mm if you don't want to spook them away.
Of course, as mentioned, the 100mm can be used on a FF. It makes for a wonderful portrait lens also.
Great! Thanks guys! I am contemplating on the 60 but then again it is an EFS so it is not flexible in case I upgrade in future. But then again some people say "then sell it when the time comes".
The 100 indeed seems to be a bit long for portraits and thats whats stopping me altough I heard it is superior to its 60 brother.
The 85 seems just right but then again it is not flexible to be a macro lens
The 100 indeed seems to be a bit long for portraits and thats whats stopping me altough I heard it is superior to its 60 brother.
The 85 seems just right but then again it is not flexible to be a macro lens
Yeap there will always be pros and cons, so think what you really need, least it ends up being a paper weigh
- Status
Similar threads
