DSLR Macro Lens opinions please.

I would choose #2.

#1 is a bit too short. IMO, 100mm is about the shortest lens you'll want to use for coin photos because of working distance (longer lenses give you more flexibility in lighting). It is probably the best of the three, image wise.
#3 lacks a bit in image and build quality against #2 and #1
#2 is the best combination of working distance, image quality, and build quality, in my experience.

I have owned lens #2 and #3 (#2 was replaced with #3, and #3 was replaced with a Nikon 200mm). I have never owned #1 (but I did own the older version (i.e. AF-D, not VR) of the Nikon equivalent).

All of the above said, you really can't go wrong with any of the lenses. They will all do just fine for coin photography. If you are budget-conscious, even the cheapest on the list will do a superb job.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't say this frequently, but that's an awesome photo, Matt.

 

Hey Mike, how do you like the Nikon 200mm?

 

Bob, It sounds to me like you got a bad copy of the Sigma. One piece of glass not sitting just right, and out the window goes the image quality. FWIW, the copy I got was superb, but I eventually sold it for the Tamron 180 and then the Nikon 200. I typically work with my local camera shop, who lets me try the lenses before I buy them, just to be sure I get a good copy -- it is not that unusual to find a bad lens (Tamron and to a lesser extent Sigma, but even Canon and Nikon will occasionally send out a bad lens).

 

I haven't bought another lens since I bought that one, if that tells you anything.

The 200mm is by far the best in everything, except extreme closeups (the 60mm actually is the best for extreme detail).

[edited to add the only two macros I've not tried are the Nikon zoom macro (70-180, IIRC), and the new Zeiss ones (50 & 100mm, IIRC) and the Nikon 200mm is the best of the lot as far as Nikon-mounts are concerned, IMO]

p.s. if you're coming to FUN and are bringing your camera, I'll bring the lens so you can check it out. PM me if interested.

 

I thought the same thing. Previously I had heard nothing but raves about the Sigma 150. I know it doesn't take much to change the focus. I'm a happy camper now.

 

It doesn't surprise me you like the 180mm Canon, it's a superb lens from all that I've read on the topic.

That said, there are a couple of fundamental rules in coin photography, and I think you'll agree:

1) Longer = better (because of light placement and working distance)
2) Canon&Nikkor > Tamron&Sigma (some say Zeiss is even better than Canon/Nikkor, but I haven't used them, and their longest offering is 100mm)

Of course, there are exceptions to this and every other rule, but the above holds true in most circumstances, IMO.

 

I was browsing one of the camera magazine couple days ago and it recommended http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF-90mm-2-8-SP/dp/B00021EEA4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1291933549&sr=8-1 They compared this with other name brands (nikon, canon, and some other) and it was their best buy. I have never used it but I'm in the market for a macro lens as well so I'll throw it out and see if anyone would recommend it

 

I've not used the Tamron 90, but I have also heard good things about it (from macro/photography circles, not coin photography). Personally, it's a bit on the short side.

Be careful with recommendations from magazines. I don't know which one you purchased, but many common photography magazines are not entirely objective -- particularly if you see large, full page, adds from the lens manufacturer. In my experience, you'll get a much better read on lenses from experienced photographers that don't take advertising money. You can find these types of reports on websites dedicated to photography, like www.dpreview.com.

 

I use one and highly recommend it. Best bang for the buck.

 

Exactly, which why I created this thread. I wanted to hear from guys who shoot coins, not mamby pambies who shoot flowers and bugs and then go on to say how well the lens does a portrait.

There is some very good information in here, thank you to everyone who contributed. I am very grateful to be able to use y'all's trials and tribulations hopefully saving me the grief of second guessing after a purchase. Thank you.

I like the idea of buying the canon lens, but I worry about melting the camera. I move lights around a lot. Leadfoot, the 180 obviously didn't impress you since it appears that you thought you were upgrading to it, but yet moved on to another. So to further justify, you get what you pay for, I am convinced that the Sigma 150mm will deliver. I'll melt the 100mm and the Tamron 180 will leave me wondering if I should have doubled down for the Canon 180mm macro. (that lens is stupid money IMO)

On another forum, I posed the same question. I got what I believe is one of the most superior/perfect examples I have seen of a copper cent yet shot with the Canon 100mm and camera with same sensor size as mine but with 12.1 mp vs 10.1 on mine and a 20% deeper pixel density (3.7 vs 3.1) I need to reiterate that I only shoot copper.

Anyways, I think it will be appreciated to post the same pics for comparison and side by side study. OK below. the 1910 is from a Canon 100mm Macro on a 450D (not sure if the coin was slabbed) - The other coins are my shots from my current set up. The 1911 is raw, the 1909 is slabbed - the first 09 pic captures the luster, the second one was lit from a similar angle as that perfectly imaged 1910.

I resized all these images to be the same size. ~1080x1080

Interesting/coincidently that the depth of field DOF is very similar where the focus was on the field. It is most noticeable on highpoints of the 1910 & 1909 date and "LIBERTY"'s highpoints slightly out of focus .