Which macro lens for Canon 7D

I am trying to decide which macro lens to get for my Canon 7D. I am leaning towards either the "EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro" (which would be the equivalent to an 80mm on the 7D) or the "EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM" (both are Canon lens). I like the idea of an 80mm lens (EF 50mm), but the reviews of the EF-S 60mm seem to be better.

Any thoughts or suggestions? Any experience with after mark lens in this range?

Thanks,

Russ

Russ, I am using the Canon 100mm Macro and have been very happy with it's performance on my 7D. Also added a Backscatter Macro-Mate for some awesome Super-macro shots. Alan

I am trying to decide which macro lens to get for my Canon 7D. I am leaning towards either the "EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro" (which would be the equivalent to an 80mm on the 7D) or the "EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM" (both are Canon lens). I like the idea of an 80mm lens (EF 50mm), but the reviews of the EF-S 60mm seem to be better.

 

Any thoughts or suggestions? Any experience with after mark lens in this range?

 

Thanks,

 

 

Russ

The EF-S 60 will do 1:1 Macro out of the box, the EF 50 will need a life size converter to do so, and that will complicate the heck out of your life underwater, stick to the 60mm (or the 100mmm Macro) and IMO stick to Canon for these lenses, third party are sometime hard to integrate into a housing system.

Hi Russ,

I own both the Canon Macros, 60mm and 100mm. Without knowing the subject 'size' you are interested in shooting, and if you are, for now, only going with one Macro, I'd go with the Canon 60mm Macro. I use this lens more often than the 100mm Macro. Great 'little' lens and a bit more versatile, imho, than the 100mm. It can shoot the small stuff and also is a great fish-face lens and can 'reach out there' and grab subjects flying by, like turtles and rays.

Also agree with Viz'art and go with the Canon lens(s) because of what he mentions about support.

Larry

I'll add the Sigma 50mm macro, which does 1:1 without the converter the Canon version requires. It also goes to f45.

If you've never shot the 100macro underwater, be prepared for a bit of a learning curve, mainly on aiming and focusing. You'll have narrow DOF on top of having a hard time finding your subject if you're at 1.6:1 (full magnification on a crop body). The 60mm might be a better choice for more generic macro. The 100 is great for the tiny stuff, adding a diopter will get you the teeny tiny stuff!

S.

I have the Sigma 50mm and found the focus slow and you needed to use an extension if the lens was fully extended.

I have the Canon 60mm (lens does not extend so no extension needed) now and really like the flexibility it offers. The 100mm Canon is great and has a fast focus but can be challenging to shoot at first. It does allow images of those more shy subjects that would require you to approach closer with the 60mm.

My vote would be the 60mm Canon to start.

Cheers

Todd

There are two more options I don't see any one has mentioned. There is Tamron AF 60mm f/2 Di II LD [iF] SP macro which has some very good reviews and Sigma's AF 70mm f/2.8 EX DG macro, another very sharp lens, here is the review on it

If you've never shot the 100macro underwater, be prepared for a bit of a learning curve, mainly on aiming and focusing. You'll have narrow DOF on top of having a hard time finding your subject if you're at 1.6:1 (full magnification on a crop body). The 60mm might be a better choice for more generic macro. The 100 is great for the tiny stuff, adding a diopter will get you the teeny tiny stuff!

 

S.

I have not used a 60mm, but found the combo of a 100mm f/2.8L and the 7D very easy to use on my recent trip, which was my first time shooting a DSLR underwater....it almost felt like cheating.

There are two more options I don't see any one has mentioned. There is Tamron AF 60mm f/2 Di II LD [iF] SP macro which has some very good reviews and Sigma's AF 70mm f/2.8 EX DG macro, another very sharp lens, here is the review on it

I love the Tamron 60mm f2.0 macro. I have the the Canon 60mm as well but I now tend to use the Tamron more. Image quality is excellent on both but with the Tamron you have the extra versatility of being able to add a teleconverter. This means that with a 1.4 tele you can have a 84mm f2.8 lens and you could also use it on a full frame camera. The 2.0 aperture makes it the brightest of all the macro lenses and another advantage is that it has a slightly longer working distance than the Canon 60mm.

There are two more options I don't see any one has mentioned. There is Tamron AF 60mm f/2 Di II LD [iF] SP macro which has some very good reviews and Sigma's AF 70mm f/2.8 EX DG macro, another very sharp lens, here is the review on it

The Tamron copy that I had was very slow to focus, but supposedly that has been fixed (with the underexposure). The Sigma is a very nice lens, but it extends enormously (in the words of Mike Johnston it would make a Victorian Lady Faint).

Bill

I have used the canon 100mm with the 1Ds mark 2 it did a great job the canon 60mm is no slouch either. You should ask yourself what kind of working comfort zone you want from the front of your port to your subject. I have seen divers use 200mm lens for macro work because they could not get close enough to those little eels that live in open sandy bottoms. Try to stick with canon on this matter. That said I have just purchased a Tokina 10-17mm for wide angle work.

Safe diving

Peter

I own both as well 60 and 100, 1:1 with both, but more standoff with the 100mm which is good unless the water is full of particulate matter. I use my 60mm the most for the same reasons others have mentioned..versatility.

good luck with the purchase

oh yeah..+1 for the macromate from backscatter, worth the money without a doubt.

the working distance to achieve 1:1 with the 60mm is so close to the front of the port as to not be of much use. i've used the 60 and 100 and sold the 60. the working distance of the 100 lets you photograph small and/or shy stuff with enough working distance to get some light from the flash in

for fish, the 60 is fine and a very sharp lens. the older design 50 extends as it focuses which makes macro much more difficult

Hey guys. Been reading all of these posts and I have identified two Lens which really standout, 'Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L' and 'Canon EF-S 60mm f2.8'. How do these work out for filming underwater. It has been said that you need to be really close with 60, and the 100 allows you a bit more distance. Is the image stabiliser going to help filming in the 100mm? Has any one had any experience filming... I guess it would be hard filming with a macro... is their anything one can do to combat this?

I guess it would be hard filming with a macro... is their anything one can do to combat this?

Hi partner,

Welcome to Wetpixel! I'm assuming that we're talking about shooting video. Handholding for macro is pretty tough and far beyond my limited ability to maintain a steady camera. The best macro video I've seen was shot using a tripod. There are a couple of threads where the options are discussed. The short version is to use a small plastic unit like a gorilla pod or a more expensive units like the new tripods from Aquatica, xit 404, and Ultralight .

I haven't had much luck just using the IS on the lens, but I'm getting older and a little shaky. The doctor said it had something to do with the 60's.

Steve

just about any macro is going to require flash which makes IS unnecessary. the IS on the 100L can be very useful on land which is why i use it.

i've played around with video a bit using the 5D2 and agree with Steve that you have to use a tripod to get anything worthwhile. the other problem is the lack of useful autofocus during video, this pretty much means small apertures for depth of field where motion is essentially across the field of view and/or confined to a small area