User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Canon 50/2.5 or 100/2.8 for micro shots

  1. #1
    Member dannat's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2010
    Location
    WOODEND
    Posts
    85
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Canon 50/2.5 or 100/2.8 for micro shots

    am wanting a sharper lens for micro shots of plants/fungi/water drops..from a close distance.... i usually use a 35-70, and am thinking of the 50/2.5. i chose this because i can use it for astro night shots as well, & it is said to be sharp (i would sell my 50/1.8 - & prob use some ext tubes on 70-210 if i need a longer reach)


    i also have a 50/1.8 & am wondering if i should keep it & get a 100mm macro - which is better for macro but not so useful for night shots / twilight shots as the 50/2.5 would be

    am i missing anything?
    Last edited by dannat; 27-07-2011 at 9:44am.
    Oly e500 zd14-54 zd70-300
    35-70/4 70-210/4 (leftover from old camera )

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Oct 2010
    Location
    Greenwich
    Posts
    1,708
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The 50mm 2.5 requires an expensive adaptor to allow it to reproduce images at 1:1, while most other macro lenses don't.

    The 100macro lenses are all good lenses and very sharp, almost regardless of the brand, but have you considered the Canon 60mm F2.8 macro lens?
    A real beauty, very sharp, nice colours, good auto focus and reasonable price - especially if you buy it for the right place.
    It's nice and small too and takes great pictures both close up and distant.
    Sigma, Tamron, Tokina etc all have lenses around the 50-70mm mark as well as around the 90-100mm and none of them are duds.
    All my photos are taken with recycled pixels.
    Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
    Wisdom, is knowing not to serve it in a fruit salad.

  3. #3
    Still in the Circle of Confusion Cage's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Hunter Valley
    Posts
    5,351
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Have you tried your 50 F1.8 with a reverse mount adaptor?
    Cheers
    Kev

    D600 : D7200 and too much stuff to list

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Aug 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    252
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I bought the Canon 100 f2.8 Macro for around $800 locally in June.
    When I got back from holidays I discovered that one of the other retailers in Brisbane actually emailed me a lower price ($760).
    It has quick and accurate focus, is laser sharp and provides excellent colour rendition.
    At 1:1 the front element of the lens is about 30cm from the subject.
    The 50 is going to put you even closer to your subject, about 22cm and only gives you half life size.
    If you are happy to buy grey, I think you can get the 100 for around $600.
    Last edited by unistudent1962; 27-07-2011 at 11:02am.
    Mark

    Canon 70D w/Grip l Canon 60D w/Grip l EF 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS USM l EF 70-200 f4L IS USM l EF-S 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM l EF 100 f2.8 USM Macro l EF-S 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM l EF 50 f1.8 II l Canon EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM l 430 EX II Flash l Rode Stereo VideoMic l Manfrotto 055XPROB + 498RC2 Tripod l Benro MP-96 M8 Monopod l Lowepro Vertex 200 AW Backpack l Lowepro Pro Runner 300 AW Backpack l PS CS5 Extended l Lightroom 4.3

  5. #5
    Member
    Threadstarter
    dannat's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Nov 2010
    Location
    WOODEND
    Posts
    85
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks so far, I would prefer not to get the 60/2.8 as in future I might get a 5d

    I should have added for star shots, the 50/1.8 performs good at f4, while the 50/2.5 seems to perform well at f3.2. I will use the lens for half/half micro/astro

  6. #6
    can't remember Tannin's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Apr 2007
    Location
    Ballarat
    Posts
    2,895
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The 50mm "macro" is not in fact a macro lens at all. It only becomes one when you add the "lifesize converter" which is a dedicated teleconverter which only works on that particular lens and costs nearly as much as the lens itsef. You wind up spending around $700 for a weird, ancient, and rather limited little lens.

    The Canon EF-S 60mm macro, in contrast, is a modern design which is perfect in every way apart from not having IS. A briliant little lens which can easily be resold to willing buyers if you go full-frame one day, and should l be much easier to move on than the weirdo 50mm macro. If you own a 60mm macro, you are unlikely to ever use your 50/1.8 again, the EF-S macro beats it in just about every way - even speed is a wash as you need to stop the 50/1.8 down a bit to achive decent sharpness and by the time you do that you are around f/2.8 anyway, and the EF-S macro is sharp as you like wide open.

    Both of the 100mm macros are excellent, but the outstanding new L Series one with IS is the one to have, if you are going to this focal length.
    Tony

    People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    30 Dec 2009
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    266
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use the Canon 100 mm macro none IS its a great lens and relatively cheap.

    Highly recommendable

    Regards
    Last edited by Pine; 27-07-2011 at 1:00pm. Reason: grammar
    Bodies : Canon 450D, Canon 7D
    Lenses : Canon 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon 100mm F2.8 Makro USM, Canon 24-70 L F2.8 USM, Canon 70-200 L F4, Canon 100-400 L F4.5-5.6L IS USM
    Editing : Photoshop CS5

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •