......and I still can't make up my mind

[mattx]

I'm after another lens for my camera - after reading this [ as I want a 100mm Macro ]

 

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM vs Tamron SP Autofocus 90mm f/2.8 DI Macro Lens - photo.net

 

I can't make up my mind - if anyone has got either of these lenses, care to make a comment.....?

[tom_newton]

I'm waiting for Ric_ "I've got every lens canon ever made so i'm moving onto Sigmas" Charlton to appear...

[Ric_]

@mattx: If that's the Tamron that I just got rid of it's a bit lame... focussing is rubbish and the lens feels very cheap. The Canon one is meant to be nice but no where near as nice as the EF 100mm f/2.8L IS. The 100mm Canon is also meant to be very good for portrait photography and the image stablaisation has been magiced up to work better for close up macro stuff.

 

@tom_newton: I don't have every lens... I've been through a fair few mind. The only reason I went for Mr Siggy Fish was because of the bargain price and the excellent reviews (It also focusses at 15cm!)

[SteveBentley]

I generally find autofocus to be a pain for macro shots, so I wouldn't be too concerned by the slower focussing performance of the Tamron

[Ric_]

I generally find autofocus to be a pain for macro shots, so I wouldn't be too concerned by the slower focussing performance of the Tamron

 

It also 'gets longer' as you focus, which is very annoying. The Canon 100mm lenses are generally considered the best for macro photography on a Canon.

[tom_newton]

Aha... as if by magic, Ric appears.

I was out yesterday at a horse show (wife's fault). Had the 1-4, but was a bit dull, so I spent some time wishing I had a 70-200 2.8 IS like yours Ric. I also spent some time wishing i'd invested in something to protect my cobblers after that accursed future-glue booted a barrier into me soft bits.

 

Bloody horse.

[Busybub]

Use to use a friend's Canon when I still had the system. Now have the Tamron in a different mount.

 

The review you've linked is very similar to others I have seen and is a fair assessment of both, though I should add that if you were considering the Sigma 105 as an alternative it was comprehensively trounced by these two in every review I have ever seen. The 150mm is a different story altogether. Some reviews have put the Canon on top, others the Tamron (and this includes comparisons with the Nikon 105). In practice the differences are generally so small that image quality alone is not usually the deciding factor. That said, I have never experienced the flare issues highlighted with either lens, but I am not usually in the habit of putting multiple lights sources in my pictures.

 

Build quality of the Tamron is a bit cheap (hardly surprising for a cheap lens), but the glass is top-notch. I'd happily buy it again in any mount. The only reasons I would pick the Canon would be for manual override of focussing, and ability to add a tripod mount to it.

 

On the other hand, I usually travel light, the Tamron is smaller and lighter, and being able to leave the lens hood in the box (because the front element is so deeply recessed) is a bigger advantage to me than all the other factors. Your needs may be different. Choose accordingly, you can't go wrong with either.

[Valentine]

My son told me about this thread - so I'm using his logon. Re the lens choice, it is actually pretty hard to buy a bad macro lens. They may vary in Af speed and whether the lens extends when focussing and build quality but optically they are all very similar in performance. I always use MF with macro lenses and also preset the the magnification I want before moving in on the subject, so AF speed and lens extension are not a problem at least for me.

I'm fairly well known in internet macrophotography circles (as LordV) see Flickr: Lord V's Photostream for some pics.

I currently use either a Tamron90mm or a canon MPE-65 macro lens.

 

Valentines Dad

[mattx]

My son told me about this thread - so I'm using his logon. Re the lens choice, it is actually pretty hard to buy a bad macro lens. They may vary in Af speed and whether the lens extends when focussing and build quality but optically they are all very similar in performance. I always use MF with macro lenses and also preset the the magnification I want before moving in on the subject, so AF speed and lens extension are not a problem at least for me.

I'm fairly well known in internet macrophotography circles (as LordV) see Flickr: Lord V's Photostream for some pics.

I currently use either a Tamron90mm or a canon MPE-65 macro lens.

 

Valentines Dad

 

Lordy - just drooling over some of those pictures on your Dad's flickr account.....

[mattx]

I've just made up my mind and ordered the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM. It was very strange, all of a sudden my credit card just popped out of my wallet and the phone automatically rang WarehouseExpress - It was all very strange - the Mrs won't believe it when she pops back from the shops.....

[robk]

Lordy - just drooling over some of those pictures on your Dad's flickr account.....

 

I second that, fantastic images.

[mattx]

Well it arrived this morning so I took it out the box, stuck it right on my camera, I did not make any setting changes so the white balance, ISO and everything else was way off buy managed to get two shots off before the heaven's opened.....

 

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4137/4890517280_e45952be3d.jpg

 

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4080/4889918131_1eba4f8b01.jpg

 

Lens is just brilliant - just need to get used to the weight. Very happy I went with the Canon over the Tamron. I do have a Tamron 70 to 300mm which is great for everyday shots etc but you can really tell the difference between build quality.