Canon 100mm f2.8 macro?

[geoffcox]

Hello,

I have found a Canon 100mm macro f2.8? for £350 online - is this the one for me? I have a Canon 400D.

I want to be able to use take portraits and use the macro setting.

I read that the Tamron 90mm is cheaper, good optically but not so good on AF with macro (hunts).

The Canon is the one to go for?

Cheers

Geoff

[daveb975]

It is supposed to be a great lens, and I think there is cashback available at the moment.

I have just bought the Tamron 90mm for my 400D. I prefer the look of the Canon, and the AF is supposed to be better, but I don't think that I will really use AF for macro shots anyway.

The Tamron is £200 from Onestop Digital, so the difference in price for the Canon was just too much for me. I will be interested to hear how you get on with it if you do get it.

[h4rri]

If you bought this for the 400D it would equate to a 160mm Macro [including the 1.6x crop factor] I personally would be looking at the 60mm EF-S Macro, one very nice lense and would equate to 90mm[ish] on the 400D. Alot lighter, smaller and more suited to the 400D.

I was going to say it would be a bit long too but being new to photography, did not want to say something I am new to and maybe wrong.

In a regular size house situation and for portraits, a 100mm on a 1.6x body may end up giving a lot of face only shots (may get the shoulders too if taken from opposite end of a mid size room, half body if taken from the opposite end of a largish romm), even find sometimes 50mm a tad too long but that's me. You may struggle even more if there is more than one person in the shot. If outdoor portraits then you can move back easily.

The advantage of longer lens is obviously maybe a more natural shot as the lens is not right in the face of the subject. The best bet is to go in a camera shop and have a look through different lenses.

Surely more experience forum members can help further.

[allie5]

That price is a bit steep.

If you have a look at the ebay seller Kerso and email him direct, he will do it for a smidge over £300 (he quoted me £306) plus you get your canon cashback on this as he is UK based. Im still in two minds about this lens - like you Ive considered the Tamron and like h4rri Ive considered the 60mm but just cant decide!

The only thing that put me off the 60mm was some "macro" experts on another board said it wasnt QUITE long enough for small bugs - though its perfect for flowers. I would have thought for portraits though, it would be ideal and it will save you about £100. If you arent going to use it for nature work then Id say the 60mm would be a better bet - the 100mm is a surprisingly big lens.

[geoffcox]

Originally Posted by h4rri

If you bought this for the 400D it would equate to a 160mm Macro [including the 1.6x crop factor] I personally would be looking at the 60mm EF-S Macro, one very nice lense and would equate to 90mm[ish] on the 400D. Alot lighter, smaller and more suited to the 400D.

What I liked about the Canon 100mm was that I could stand well back from the subject and still fill the frame with the face. I am looking for a suitable lens for taking photos of my 11 month old grandson and if I get too close he gets too interested in the camera!

I like the sound of the Tamron 28-75mm but cannot find one to try out. Are there any UK camera megastores where I might find a bigger selection of lenses on show?

Cheers

Geoff

[Steve N]

Originally Posted by geoffcox

... Canon 100mm macro f2.8? .... is this the one for me?
I want to be able to use take portraits and use the macro setting.

IMHO this would be the ideal choice for what you want.

If it is full face frame filled you are after, this may well be it.

[Chunder]

The 100mm is a perfect portrait length on a full frame camera (the 5D) but I'd have thought it would be a bit constraining indoors.

I also loathe the autofocus on it - it's fast when it's an easy focus, but any difficulty in obtaining the initial focus means it whirrs from close to macro and back, and it isn't quick about it. Frustrating.

[h4rri]

Originally Posted by Chunder

The 100mm is a perfect portrait length on a full frame camera (the 5D) but I'd have thought it would be a bit constraining indoors.

I also loathe the autofocus on it - it's fast when it's an easy focus, but any difficulty in obtaining the initial focus means it whirrs from close to macro and back, and it isn't quick about it. Frustrating.

I've found that too on the 5D, it's too long for indoor use with portraits really and does hunt alot. Really fancy something better but on FF it's a limited choice

If it is not a massive print you are after, you can always crop your image from a shorter lens to the exact way you want it, you won't be able to do it the other way round. Also with the potential of the baby moving out of the frame, there is more of a chance on getting a keeper from a shorter lens.