Canon Lens questions...

[twinspots_goby]

Hi guys. I'm always amazed by the superb quality of the pictures posted here. I keep telling myself I will take some quality pictures someday. Now I have a canon 40D. I'm looking for a good lens to shoot for my corals. What would you guys recommend? I appreciate your help.

 

[twinspots_goby]

I'm especially interested taking very close shots.

 

[dustinP]

either a canon ef-s 60mm macro or a canon ef 100mm macro

 

[twinspots_goby]

Thanks for your suggestion DustinP. With these lens, am I able to take some very close shots? Are the pictures close enough to even show the polyps?

 

[swjim]

Yes, if you're really interested in getting close then go for the longer lens, the 100mm. Either should be able to get you polyp shots unless you have an unusually deep tank.

 

[twinspots_goby]

I have a 70mm -200mm f 2.8. Do you think this lens would work? So far I couldn't shoot single close shot with this lens. Is it my skill problem or the lens functionality? Thanks.

 

[Blazer88]

The 70-200 F/2.8, while a great lens, isn't the best for getting macro shots due to the minimum focusing distance. Most of the dedicated macro lens will give you great results, I've had the 60mm F/2.8, 100mm F/2.8, and Sigma 150mm F/2.8 and loved them all. The Canon 100mm seems to be the middle of the road in terms of working distance and a very popular choice.

 

[twinspots_goby]

How about the 10 - 22mm? This lens has a very short focusing distance. Would it be a great lens to take close shots?

 

[Wolverine]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15061180#post15061180 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by twinspots_goby
How about the 10 - 22mm? This lens has a very short focusing distance. Would it be a great lens to take close shots?

As a wide-angle lens, it's not as good for getting the shots it sounds like your interested in. For the Canon, the 100mm f/2.8 is definitely the best option.

 

[twinspots_goby]

Which one is better, 100mm f2.8 or 100mm f2.0?

 

[swjim]

For macro work, the 100mm f/2.8.

 

[Wolverine]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15061301#post15061301 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by twinspots_goby
Which one is better, 100mm f2.8 or 100mm f2.0?

The f/2.8 is the macro lens, which, from what you've said, is what you want, since you want to get the close, tight shots.
The f/2.0 would be like setting your 70-200 at 100mm and taking the shot, which isn't what you're looking for.

 

[twinspots_goby]

Got it! thanks for your help.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

Like others have said you want the 100mm f/2.8
The 70-200 f/2.8 is an awesome lens but not made for this purpose.
The ef-s 60mm will let you get VERY VERY close (like texture of individual hairs on an ant's head close) but you should start with the 100mm f/2.8 (NOT f/2)

 

[boodlefish]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15065752#post15065752 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by TitusvileSurfer
Like others have said you want the 100mm f/2.8
The 70-200 f/2.8 is an awesome lens but not made for this purpose.
The ef-s 60mm will let you get VERY VERY close (like texture of individual hairs on an ant's head close) but you should start with the 100mm f/2.8 (NOT f/2)

So this seems curious to me, why would the ef-s 60mm get you closer then the ef-100mm f/2.8? Or is it that they both get close but the 100mm can also get a wider shot? which one is better for shooting a 24" wide and 21" deep tank? oh and, what does the "s" on the ef-s 60mm stand for? and why not on the ef-100mm f/2.8?
thanks

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

EF-s lenses can only be used with 1.6x crop factor cameras. The more expensive 35mm or 1.3x crop factor cameras would break if you tried to use the lens with them. EF can be used by all EOS cameras.

The ef-s 60mm can zoom in 5 times more than the 100mm. It wouldn't be much help in a fish tank though because you would have to be millimeters away from what you are taking a picture of to achieve that.

 

[boodlefish]

thanks TitusvileSurfer.
how about the differ between, the EF-100mm f/2.8 and the EF-180mm f/3.5L? the 100mm is obviously the weapon of choice for reefers due to cost, but would the 180mm be a better choice a multi use lens? shooting nature ect..
i could in no way justify the $$$ tag for macro alone but, if it would be a good lens for other shooting environments.

 

[BlueCorn]

The the 180 gives you over the 100 is working distance. Both lenses provide 1:1 magnification at their minimum focusing distance. The 180 just allows you to farther away. When shooting things like bugs, snakes, spiders, etc that might be a good thing. It's also much larger and heavier than the 100 so you need to take that into consideration.

Cheers

 

[dendronepthya]

The other difference between the 100 and 180 is given the same aperture and framing, you would get different backgrounds.

 

[boodlefish]

Wow thanks all for the useful info.
and sorry if i kinda hijacked your thread: twinspots_goby.