DSLR Macro Lens opinions please.

This may not be a realistic question however it never hurts to ask? I have narrowed down my search to 3 lens. all 3 fit into my price range - that shouldn't affect your opinion. All have general rave reviews. Now I need to hear from those who have experience with these lens - hopefully someone has experience with all 3 !

I am using a coin dedicated Canon 40D tethered to my computer. After experimenting with 5 different lenses, I am getting the best results from a tube extended Nikor 35-70mm adapted to fit my Canon. I manually focus and then use the crank on my copy stand to fine tune the resolution.

I want a lens that a penny will fill the frame without using extension tubes I also want a lens that I can control from the computer.

These are my Macro 3 choices: Which one would you pick and why?

1. Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro Autofocus Lens B&H @ $519 (chose because it is Canon but I think it I wont have room for lighting) Link http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&sku=194451&is=USA&A=details&Q=

2. Sigma Telephoto 150mm f/2.8 EX APO Macro EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS B&H @ 729 (you get what you pay for?) Link http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/352422-USA/Sigma_104101_150mm_f_2_8_EX_APO.html

3. Tamron Telephoto SP AF 180mm f/3.5 Di LD IF Macro Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS B&H @ $639 (have to send in rebate - I will need to build a new bigger sturdier copy stand - this one will allow the most room for lighting flexibility) Link http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/284404-REG/Tamron_AFB01C700_180mm_f_3_5_Macro_Autofocus.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

stick with cannon products.

 

I have had, (well wife has had), good luck with both Canon and Tamron lenses, so I am not sure there is a need to stick with Canon. You mentioned ability to get light in, I would go with a lense that best facilitates use. You seem to have done your homework.

 

I have a Sigma... and from time to time it leaves a little to be desired.

 

Really, most people rave about the Sigma 105mm. I think that is what Chris (Marauder) uses.

 

Yep!

The key is LIGHTING! The key to great pictures is use Daylight bulbs.

 

Holy krikeys, how many dang Chris' are there on this board?

Chris

 

Here's with a 105mm sigma

 

That's the same setup I use with 3 daylight bulbs... 40D...105 MM sigma. sometimes I think the pictures could be more crisp...

 

what settings are you using? try adjusting your apeture and or isos etc.

 

I've tried playing with most all of the settings... I mean I can take what I think are good pictures... but I don't think they are exceptional. Let me look at my settings and get back with ya in a min.

 

It looks like my iso is set at 250 and my apeture is set at 26

 

are you using a Camera stand?

 

Whoa! Try using something between F/8 and F/11. If you're really using F/26, you're losing a lot of detail due to diffraction.

I use a Canon 100mm macro on an old 20D, and I seem to get the best results around F/8. One good thing about shooting coins -- the narrow depth of field that you get shooting macro isn't usually a problem, so you don't need to stop down the way you do for (say) insects.

 

This. mine varies from F8-F11 depending on size of the coin.

 

I'm a little puzzled. Why do you change the f-stop for different coin sizes?

 

To get back to the OP's original question, I picked the Canon 100mm, because I got a good deal on a used one.

I've shot with an original Digital Rebel and a 20D.

I've used four Sigma lenses -- the 18-50/2.8, the 28-300, the 20/1.8, and the 10-20 ultrawide. I've been reasonably happy with the 10-20, but all four have had focusing issues, the 20/1.8 is terrible until you stop down to f/5.6 or so (so what's the point of having an f/1.8 lens?), and the 28-300 had to go back for repair because the aperture control stopped working.

I regularly use the Canon 100mm macro and the 100-400L telephoto. Both are head and shoulders above any of the Sigma glass I've got. I wasn't terribly happy with the 18-55 that came with my Rebel, and my Canon 50mm/1.8 isn't really outstanding, but in general I've been MUCH happier with Canon than Sigma. (I've also got a Sigma 500 flash and a Sigma ring-flash; in both cases, they were much cheaper than the Canon equivalents, but I'm not sure they work as well.)

 

Some coins I feel require a different F stop to get the best possible detail.

 

I have a Canon 100mm and had a Sigma 150mm. I love the way the 100mm could get a crisp, well focused image whereas the Sigma 150 was extremely underwhelming. Images were always slightly out of focus despite using a bubble level on the countertop and lens, a heavy duty copy stand and a multitude of different setting on the camera. These included f-stops from f6.3 - f11 and iso of 100 and 200. I purchased a Canon 180mm after selling the Sigma and it is a dream. The only advantage it has over the 100mm is being able to get the lights closer and higher to the subject. Other than that they both result in crisp, well focused shots. I'm not sure how Tamron compares to Canon, but the Sigma 150mm was a nightmare.

 

I do use a camera stand.

I changed the settings on the camera and this was the result of the picture. Thoughts?