New Canon 60mm EF-S macro lens?

[mike89t]

Anyone try out the 60mm Canon EF-S macro lens yet?

I've read some good reviews on it and it's $80 cheaper than the 100mm Macro. Just wanted to see if anyone has used one yet and what they think about it.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...176&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

 

[bamann345]

get the 100mm macro. many say it is the best macro lense out there. I had the same choice about 6 months ago and pick up the 100mm and have never had a second though!

William

Also, the front element dosent extend when focusing which is nice since you can put it right on the glass to take pictures and to focus.

 

[Blazer88]

Not to mention the EF-s is compatible with less Canon's (vs. the EF mount) and will hurt the resale value if you ever want to sell it. Plus I wouldn't want the range of the 60mm, I like the 100mm much better.

 

[jwedehase]

A friend and I were debating this recently. He's one of those people who lives by the stats and numbers, and believes them with Bible truth and finality. I'm more of a "let me use it and see" person. I've used both on a 20D, and was disappointed with the 60mm. All the stats show it to actually be a sharper lens, supposedly. Its "Lines per Inch" is higher than the 100mm, supposedly, as is color accuracy. However, I found the 100mm to smoke the 60mm out of the water, in my own personal use.

My thoughts are that if it's really that much sharper and accurate, why is it cheaper? Again, according to the numbers, the 60mm is supposedly as sharp as most of the L series lenses (ranges above 2000 lpi), but this wasn't my experience.

Here are the best I was able to come up with using the 60mm:

Certainly not junk, by any means. However, I've had better experiences with the 100mm:

 

[astrogazer]

I like a longer macro for the extra 'reach' it will give you.

 

[astrogazer]

btw jwedehase ... nice images there... You do very good work!

 

[mike89t]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8242249#post8242249 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jwedehase
A friend and I were debating this recently. He's one of those people who lives by the stats and numbers, and believes them with Bible truth and finality. I'm more of a "let me use it and see" person. I've used both on a 20D, and was disappointed with the 60mm. All the stats show it to actually be a sharper lens, supposedly. Its "Lines per Inch" is higher than the 100mm, supposedly, as is color accuracy. However, I found the 100mm to smoke the 60mm out of the water, in my own personal use.

My thoughts are that if it's really that much sharper and accurate, why is it cheaper? Again, according to the numbers, the 60mm is supposedly as sharp as most of the L series lenses (ranges above 2000 lpi), but this wasn't my experience.

Here are the best I was able to come up with using the 60mm:

Certainly not junk, by any means. However, I've had better experiences with the 100mm:

Perfect!

Thats exactly the kind of review I was looking for. Thank you so much for the comparison shots.