Choosing a macro lens for a Canon APS-C body: 60mm vs 100mm for macro and portraits
Asked 7/20/2010
4 views
2 answers
0
I use a Canon 40D and want a macro lens that can also work for portraits. My budget is limited, and I’m considering the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro and Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, plus similar Sigma or Tamron options. My main uses would be general macro, occasional insect photography, and portrait work. What are the main trade-offs between 60mm and 100mm on APS-C, and is one clearly better for these uses?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
16y ago
2 Answers
7
When it comes to macro lenses, two of the things you need to take into account is Depth of Field and Field of View. With a 60mm lens, you are going to have a greater FOV and less flexibility in terms of DOF. You'll need to get pretty close with a 60mm to do either macro photography of insects, or for portraits (unless you want the wider field for your portraits, and are not interested in getting close-up facial shots.)
On the other hand, with a 100mm macro lens, you are going to have a narrower FOV, and greater flexibility in terms of DOF due to the longer focal length. You won't need to get as close to snap shots of either insects or close up portraits.
In terms of build and construction, hands down the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens is one of their best-built lenses. It is solid, and has some of the smoothest focus I've ever encountered. Its clarity and quality are second to none. One thing you should be aware of, however, is the difference in these two lenses mounts. The 100mm is an EF lens, designed for full-frame sensors. It will work on an APS-C, however it will effectively be a 160mm lens. The 60mm is an EF-S lens, and is designed to work only on APS-C sensors. It'll effectively behave as a 96mm on a full-frame, but if you ever upgrade your camera body to an APS-H or FF, you won't be able to use it.
Originally by user124. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user124
16y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
The main trade-off is working distance and framing.
On APS-C, a 60mm macro is smaller, lighter, and easier as an everyday dual-purpose lens. It can work well for macro and casual portraits, and owners report it performs very well. The downside is that for true macro—especially insects—you must get closer to the subject.
A 100mm macro gives you more working distance at the same magnification, which is a real advantage for insects and other subjects that are hard to approach. It also works well for tighter portraits because you don’t need to be as close. Several users also praise Canon’s 100mm f/2.8 for its solid build.
So, if portraits and compactness matter most, the 60mm is a strong choice. If insect macro is important, the 100mm is usually the better fit.
There isn’t enough evidence in the answers to single out any Sigma or Tamron option as better or worse here. If you don’t actually need true macro and mainly want portraits, Canon’s inexpensive 50mm f/1.8 is also worth considering.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI16y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Which lenses should I keep when moving from Canon APS-C to full frame?
Will a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro work on an EOS 450D for insect photography?
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM vs Tamron 90mm f/2.8 VC Macro for macro and portraits
For copying artwork on APS-C, should I use a 50mm compact macro instead of a 60mm macro to work closer?
Will a full-frame Canon body show more detail than APS-C with the EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro?