If you're going to spend the money you're thinking of then there is one lens which really stands head & shoulders about this others, that is the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro currently on offer at Jacobs for £409.
The competition is the Sigma 105mm at £352 or the Tamron 90mm or £335. Both of these lenses are optically as good as the Canon, however both of them extend considerably towards the subject when focussing, and both of them have conventional micro motors making them both noisy & slow. The Canon is fully internally focussed and has a silent USM type motor which is very quick.
With a normal lens the fact that one does not focus quite as quick as another probably doesn't make a great deal of difference, but with a macro lens it does as there's a huge distance for the lens elements to travel from macro to infinity. Someone has mention the possibility of using a ring flash on the lens, personally I prefer a macro flash, but with either of these the extending lenses do not have enough power to move the lens and the flash head. Many times when I tried it, focus motors stalled and shots were lost, there is a very real risk that the focus motor will burn out.
The other reason for buying the Canon is the resale value, buy one and you will be able to sell it on Ebay for nearly as much as you paid for it, the third party offerings do tend to lose quite a bit of their value.
Talking of moving backwards & forwards (and you never did answer the question Nick!
Macro lenses and focal lengths are always a compromise, the shorter the focal length the greater the depth of field and the slower shutter speed, the longer focal length loses depth of field and needs higher shutter speed, however it gives macro magnification at a greater distance. The 100mm is seen by many as the best compromise.
21-01-10, 08:33 PM
