| Posted By |
Message |
| frodge Wed 29th Jul 2009 11:31
|
I currently own a Canon 450D and am looking to buy my first macro lens.I have been considering buying Tamrons 90mm macro that seems to be a reasonable quality lens and good value for money.
I now see that Tamron are bringing out a 60mm Macro designed for small sensors,what practical difference does this make,and how would these lenses compare with working distance, image quality ,and magnification at equivalent distances. In other words what are the pros and cons and is it worth the extra £100.
Any info would be much appreciated. Thanks Frodge
|
| Captivelight PRO Wed 29th Jul 2009 15:34
|
What do you like to photograph using a macro lens is what it comes down to ... I am assuming that both the 90 and the 60 mm lenses will both top out at 1:1 Macro ... that is life size on the sensor, so magnification isn't really an issue. The real difference between the two will be working distance to achieve that 1:1 size ratio, where the 90mm will achieve it from slightly further away, always useful if you photograph small critters that run away at the slightest movement. A 60mm will be more use for working closer in to with fixed subjects that don't get up and run ... like plants etc.
The whole "for small sensors" bit seems a little misleading as no matter what the crop factor there are those who like to work in close in confined spaces with fixed subjects who swear by a lens that will focus at 10cm and those who chase fluffy critters all over the countryside swearing that they want a Sigma 150 Macro as they can't get close enough to their chosen subject. It sounds like a marketing phrase that really means very little as most companies sell a 50/60mm and a 90/100mm macro lens, so Tamron are just fitting in.
Image quality .. who knows... until it's tested that is impossible to say. Their 90 gets good reviews, although it is up against some pretty stiff opposition. I would guess that most modern lenses, especially fixed focal length lenses, are pretty good these days, and again it will have to be pretty good to compete with the other lenses in that range that are already out there.
The big selling point is that it will be an F2 lens, not a F2.8 like the 90mm ... and that is where your extra £100 will be going. It's always nice to have a faster lens, but remember that on a macro lens working at full 1:1 Macro the DOF at F2 will be hair thin working close in.
So ... I guess it comes down to "horses for courses" ... which lens suits your style of shooting and preferred subjects...
|
| DragonSpeed PRO Wed 29th Jul 2009 19:54
|
The 90 at F2.8 will likely make a pretty sweet portrait lens too!
The "for smaller sensors" means "cheaper - we don't have to have as large an area of quality image" :)
|
| Captivelight PRO Thu 30th Jul 2009 07:52
|
Originally posted by DragonSpeed:
The "for smaller sensors" means "cheaper - we don't have to have as large an area of quality image" :)
Ummm ... NO... they sting you for the fact that it's an F2 lens, that extra stop of light costs you an extra £100 or so!
The 60 mm should make a good portrait lens on a crop sensor, I use a Canon 100 F2.8 as a portrait lens and on the crop sensor I sometimes have to step right back to use it. In actual fact the 60 would probably be better for that then the 90 ... although to be honest it would be far cheaper to simply buy a 50mm non macro lens!
|
| DragonSpeed PRO Thu 30th Jul 2009 19:06
|
Originally posted by Captivelight:
Ummm ... NO... they sting you for the fact that it's an F2 lens, that extra stop of light costs you an extra £100 or so!
But if that was designed for a FF camera then it would be ANOTHER £100 (of if NOT in Britain, probably half that ;) )
|
| biggles Fri 31st Jul 2009 14:37
|
I personally have the Sigma 105mm f 2.8. Its a pretty nice lens and not too expensive.
|
| PhotoPro PRO Tue 4th Aug 2009 08:48
|
Originally posted by biggles:
I personally have the Sigma 105mm f 2.8. Its a pretty nice lens and not too expensive.
Me too - and I love it.
I also have the Nikon 50mm 1.4 - a great lens but not a macro one.
In a perfect world, I would shoot all my portraits with the 105mm, but life usually dictates my 18-200mm..:-)
|
| frodge Wed 5th Aug 2009 01:56
|
Thanks for your help,still got time to think as I can't afford it just yet. Does seem to be a trend to make lenses specifically for smaller sensors although it does'nt seem to mean very much.I can there there is a need at the wide angle end
|
| |
173,284 members
2,597,189 photos
6,996,284 comments
