Please help ...

nick the grief · Post by **nick the grief** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:51 am

Hi All two birds with one post. Just joined the forum ( Thanks Dave W for the link) and I'm just getting ready t for the summer (hahaha that's if we have one this year!) to take some close ups of butterflies and the like at my local nature reserve where I normally take bird shots.

I've been looking at reviews of Macro lenses and have come to the conclusion ... I'm confused

Any thoughts on what you guys think would be the best out of the following list (they're all Sigma's - I know that Canon make good lenses but they are a tad more expensive)

105mm f2.8
150mm f2.8
180mm f3.5

I did consider the Tamron 180mm for a while but it doesn't seem to be any better than the sigma and it's £200 more. I leaning towards the 150 or 180 at the moment but I'll see what you guys say

TIA

puzzledpaul · Post by **puzzledpaul** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:28 am

<< I did consider the Tamron 180mm for a while but it doesn't seem to be any better than the sigma and it's £200 more. >>

Am also 'sniffing round the edges

' of a Tamron 180 and am intrigued about this price differential as I've been quoted £385 + a tenner P&P for one.

(someone I've already used (UK based) - without problems, btw - and does other stuff, but seems to specialise in Canon)

If Rik has no objections I can give further details here (for other UK ppl)?

pp

nick the grief · Post by **nick the grief** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:36 am

Hi Paul,

I was just going off RRP for a start off so hadn't got round to in detail pricing but I figure that most places would keep a similar sort of differential.

I'm still open to persuasion though

puzzledpaul · Post by **puzzledpaul** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:11 am

<< I was just going off RRP for a start off so hadn't got round to in detail pricing but I figure that most places would keep a similar sort of differential. >>

Well, staying with a UK based 'shop' (Warehouse Express), their current prices are £490 / £520 for Sigma / Tamron 180 respectively.

As regards focal length choice, the reason I'm considering a 180 is for those times when it's just extremely inconvenient / impossible to physically get as close as needed with a 100 (already have a non-usm Canon) ... eg there's only so far you can lean over a pond before gravity takes over (and Bot gdn officials frown on wading)

For about a year I used a 200mm FD macro (with converter) and miss this extra reach (but not the greater difficulty of using same

) sometimes ... so am after something with similar properties as this - but also take full advantage of flash coupling and no manual aperture adjustment.

Am certainly no expert, but using this (200) for a while has shown me what to expect in the way of handling this sort of focal length.

pp

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:49 am

puzzledpaul wrote:If Rik has no objections I can give further details here (for other UK ppl)?

No objections from me -- unbiased info in moderate terms is always welcome.

(Rants, raves, and unsupported opinions are to be avoided, of course, but I trust that won't be a problem with the current membership.

)

--Rik

puzzledpaul · Post by **puzzledpaul** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:44 am

Ok, Rik

Nick - this is the relevant Ebay site:

http://stores.ebay.co.uk/FLASH-CAMERA_W ... idZ2QQtZkm

Note the bit at the top R re discounts etc.

Name is Ian Kerr ... if you google his name and / or kerso, you'll find more info.

Re dealings - I was originally going to buy an item by getting my daughter to collect (she was on hols 15ml away from the kit) - this was fine by seller, but fell thro' for other reasons - mine, not his.

I re-contacted him in Nov and bought an MPE65 from him. Money paid Thurs am, email sent confirming, he returned saying item would be posted Fri (next day) ... item arrived on the Sat ...

Certainly no 'persuading' going on and entirely up to you where you get your kit from

pp

<< Rants, raves etc etc ... >>
In common with many ppl 'of a certain age', I suspect I can think of quite a few ... but best kept for a Fri night in a pub with mates, methinks

DaveW · Post by **DaveW** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:38 am

Hi Nick,

As I pointed out to you before, macro lenses now perform differently on the APS-C sensor regarding focal length effects. The old 105mm was the classic insect lens on 35mm film, but for the smaller Canon sensor that would now be like using a 168mm on 35mm film.

The 180mm on your Canon gives the same angle of view as using a 288mm lens on 35mm full frame. So do you need to be taking insects with what would virtually be a 300mm lens on a conventional 35mm film camera?

No doubt Rik will correct me if I am wrong, but though the working distance at the same magnification would be the same with APS-C or 35mm full frame with the same focal length, you do gain extra working distance on the smaller sensor if you are simply filling the frame with the subject because the magnification needed is less.

Even the often overlooked cheap 60mm macro lens, usually discounted for it's short working distance on 35mm full frame, assumes the same angle of view for an APS-C Canon as a 96mm would on 35mm film frame and effectively the extra working distance.

The 150mm on the APS-C sensored Canon has the same angle of view as a 240mm on 35mm full frame. Both the 150mm and 180mm on a Canon APS-C sensor therefore give you greater working distance than even the longest available macro like a 200mm Nikkor would have done on a 35mm film camera.

There is always the argument as to how the old safe handholding rule for 35mm full frame applies to APS-C sensors due to the different angle of view produced. The old rule used to be for full frame 35mm, if not using flash, "do not hand hold at any shutter speed less than the focal length of the lens". For a 180mm macro on 35mm that would mean no slower than 1/180th of second. On an APS-C sensor with the lenses angle of view acting like a 288mm on full frame does that mean not hand holding at less than 1/288th of a second? If so then whilst the longer lenses would give greater working distance, when hand holding in available light they could only be used at higher shutter speeds than would be the case on 35mm full frame, thus restricting your choice of aperture for depth of field?

DaveW

nick the grief · Post by **nick the grief** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:22 pm

Hi PP,

Strangely enough I''ve been given Ian's name by someone else regarding canon equipment so an e-mail may be in order I think.

Hi David,

Yep I still have the mail you sent and having read the reviews you sent me the links to that's when confusion set in

I must admit I'm leaning towards the 150mm sigma it seems to get good reviews although it's more expensive than the 105mm but I think the extra reach may be useful.

So Thanks all off to look at prices now.