www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

Seeing Oy's brilliant close up photographs has spurred me on to getting a macro lens for my Canon 20D. But which one? Canon seem to have 3 options the EF 100mm f/2.8 and the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 and the EF 180mm which at around £1000 is more than I want to pay. The EF-S 60mm is build for digital cameras and is equivalent to 96mm on a 35mm camera, so is almost equivalent to the 100mm and about £100 cheaper so that might be best. However there is also the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX lens.
Now to the point of the message. Will the 150mm Sigma be easier to use in the field? I assume for the same level of magnification I would not have to get as close with the 150mm as I would with a 100mm. Is this correct? Are there any other benefits of using a 150mm lens over a 100mm.

Any thoughts/views would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Robin

I personally use a 105mm Sigma lens and it's fine. Although many others recomment the 150mm because of the greater working distance.

I suspect that the 60mm might be a little more challenging since you'll have to get that much closer to the subject.

Cheers,

- Pete

I use the Sigma 150 and think it's fantastic! With the Canon 20D you will be able to get 1:1 reproduction (1.6:1 35mm equivalent if you're being picky) from over a foot away from the subject, which with flighty butterflies is invaluable.

The longer focal length does make hand held shots more difficult however, and I tend to use a tripod where possible unless it's really bright.

I recently read a review (Photgraphy Monthly - Sep) of macro lenses and the 105 Sigma came out top with the 100 Tamron. The 150 Sigma got a good review and surprisingly all of the Canon optics were deemed too expensive relative to the difference in quality you get.

Hope this helps!

I cannot advise which is the best lens but if you go to the galleries page under Sandra Standbridge, these have all been taken on a Canon 100mm macro lense, used mainly with a Canon 20D.

I hope this helps

Kevin

I use the Sigma 150mm and can't recommend it highy enough.

Buy this lens

Thanks for your input everyone. Kevin, your gallery shots are also superb and so do not make my decision any easier. I think that I'm veering towards the Sigma 150 because Oy told me I had to buy it and because it will mean that I don't have to get quite so close as I would with a 100mm lens.

Robin

It's a lot of money to spend and the reality is that none of us on here have both lenses to make a direct comparison... it might be worth getting friendly with your man at Jessops and asking to test them both!

My experience is that if you're going to spend £400 on a lense, they're more than happy to let you have a play around for an hour or so. Take some little toy figures with you and snap them with both lenses, then when you get home, have a look at your pics on the computer and make a decision based on that and handling, etc...

...and maybe it's just me, but then I feel out of respect, you should buy them from who you tested them with and not buy them 10% cheaper online ;o)

Hi Robin
the subject of buying a new macro lens can be difficult, I know hoy favours the 150 mm sigma lens and I agree the extra working distance can be useful, I have just read a macro lens review in Digital camera issue 47 June 2006 , ailthough it only reviewed the 105 mm sigma lens it favoured the tamron sp90mm dont forget on a digital camera you need to multiply the focal lens x 1.6 so this lens true focal length is 144 mm again a good working distance at under £300 the vote went to the Tamron lens, the sigma 105mm came third

A friend has the Sigma 105mm, it is so noisy, plus the external focusing means the front of the lens moves in and out rather a lot, meaning having to move the camera to reframe the subject perhaps. Other than that it is fine.

I've spent a long time trying to decide which digital slr to go for an have finally decided on the Canon EOS 30D - good choice????
I notice above that no ones mentioned zoom lenses. Will a zoom give a lower quality picture than a fixed focal length? Additionally would a genuine Canon lens, with the 30D, give a better image than say a Sigma or similar no matter how slight? and finally would an image stabilising lens reduce the image quality in any way?
Hope someone can help me out with these questions, thanks in advance.

Dave

If you are going to be shooting macros then get a macro lens, zooms don't even come into the frame. Macro lenses give vastly superior image quality, even compared to a quality zoom.

I have a macro lens (Nikkor 105VR) with image stabilising/vibration reduction call it what you will, there is no loss of quality. In fact it also allows me more freedom to obtain shots I wouldn't be able to get hand held without the VR/IS.

If you can afford it get the Canon lens, a good tripod (Gitzo Explorer + off centre ball head) as even with IS a tripod is still very useful plus ring flash.

As for a camera body, that's your choice, whatever suits your needs, hands, budget. All the quality models give similar results, it really is down to personal taste. Photoshop will give you the results you wanted in a few seconds anyway.

There goes all your spending money!

As dipper said a zoom lens is a second choice to a true macro, this is true. A lot of macro lenses do move out quite a bit when focusing, this is not a problem, once you know the subject you are photographing you shoul pre focus the lens for the subject size, this means you move in on the subject and once in focus, click, you don't often get time to focus so with practice this technique works well
I try to use natural lighting, but if you do need to use flash I use two small flash guns, I prefer this to ring flash which gives rather flat lighting without contrast

Thanks guys, that's brilliant info. I've been a long time user of Nikon Coolpix cameras from their start and although they can produce some excellent pictures I think it's now time to join the big boys. I'm now fairly happy with the choice of a Canon 30D DSLR body and my lens choice has considerably narrowed to;

Sigma Macro 150mm f/2.8 @ ca£439.99
Canon Macro 100mm f/2.8 @ ca£405.99

The fact that I also photograph Reptiles and Dragonflies is leading me toward the Sigma, simply for the extra distance I'll gain. I know it's not much but dragonflies are much more flightly than Butties although with this lens Butterflies remain my priority. I hate making decisions and I hate spending money so I'm getting in a right two and eight - does anyone have any final comments or should I go with the Sigma?
Thanks to everyone who's contributed to this thread as always your all so helpful and lovely on here. I'm also into photographing mammals and birds and so far have had no response to any requests for help about a top end lens at other forums/lists - but that's another story. Cheers.

I own a BBC wildlife POY book and all of the entries are taken, almost without exception, on CANON 500 f4L IS or 300 f2.8L IS lenses. However, you're looking at a price of over £4k and £3k respectively.

I don't own one myself, and with the girlfriend's decision to pack in her job it's looking less likely! I don't think SIGMA produce an optic to match these in terms of quality at this focal length... though you don't see many reviews to prove this.

The BBC do have an unlimited budget, so lenses etc can cost a fortune, a friend of mine works with the guys at oxford and scientific films, these guys do a lot of work for the BBC etc and again with big budgets use a lot of expensive gear, for us mere mortals we have no chance,
so buy the most expensive macro lens you can afford and enjoy using it, my old film camera was a canon and I did use the canon 100mm 2.8f lens which was pin sharp and great to use

photographing insects is all about feild craft and working distance and knoweledge of your subject you must always buy the best quality you can afford reports in photo mags will always favour the best economic lens which in reality is false its the build quality and optics that is paramount as this will give you the ultimate image always use a quality tripod at all times you must eradicate all the variables so all thats left is bad technique and bad luck i have a 20d. originally a cannon 100macro then after a few years saved up for the 180 both are stunning lens but the extra distance the 180 gives is invaluable plus a narrower feild of view which helps to cut out messy backgrounds not forgeting the ring colar which enables you to change your composition from vert to horiz quickly with the minimum of fuss last point the larger lens will require more atention to detail everything must be rock solid

best

eric

Hello
I use a 20d c/w a Tamron 90mm Macro, I find it an excellent lens with results compatable with my Canon lenses
Very light and easy to use
Cheers
PaulV

I cant say much about the Sigma as I dont use it, I use the Canon 2.8 100mm.

I find it to be a brilliant lens, quality is superb, and with my 300d gives me a nice working distance.

I think that anything longer would be too narrow depth of field and make it very difficult to get all of the butterfly in focus.

I use a Manfrotto 190pro tripod with a ball head. Very nice tripod.

You can get a brand new Canon 100mm 2.8 macro lens on ebay for £319. (thats where I got mine)

Well I've finally jumped in, I did as I was told and bought the 150mm Sigma, it arrived yesterday. Now I just have to find something to practice on.

I came back to this thread only to find that Dipper tells me I now need to buy a Gitzo tripod and a ring flash.

I have a Manfrotto CF tripod, but I can see that the extra flexibility of the Gitzo would be an advantage.

I also have a Canon 550EX Speedlight, would that be any good for macro photography or is it just too powerful for very close subjects?

Robin

I use a manfrotto 322RC head which is EXTREMELY flexible!

I also have a SIGMA 150Macro and a 550EX flashgun. If you get a STOFEN diffuser for the flash, it will be fine. One of the things that isn't considered in the other threads, is that if you do go for a longer focal length (like the 150mm), it allows you to use a hotshoe mounted flash because the lens doesn't create a shadow on the field of view!