Advice Sought: Best 100mm Macro, $1000 or Less?

Kram · Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR

2013 was a tough year and I only bought two cheap lenses. BUT 2014 is looking better and I am contemplating upgrading from my Micro-Nikkor 105 2.8 AIS.

My criteria is this:

• Must cost around $1000.

•It must not be too large including diameter of lens, as I hand hold about 99% of the time. I don't have to have 1:1.
[Rented the Canon 100/2.8 Macro with IS, very sharp but so unwieldy, I may try the non-IS version.]

•I want minimal or no CA wide open. I know this is tough in my budget. I do shoot a lot of wide-open macro.

I also am contemplating the Olympus 90/2 macro.

Thoughts? I want the highest quality including modern lenses.
^This guy is a dreamer!

nurkov · Expire: 2014-03-09

something to read

http://www.nnplus.de/macro/Macro100E.html

I know that those are AF but it's not used for macro anyway.
I have tried sony 100mm F2.8 macro, tokina 100mm F2.8 macro and canon 100mm F2.8 IS and that canon is amazing far the best macro lens I have ever seen and used and brilliant as short tele lens.

Kram · Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR

Thanks nurkov! Interesting comparisons. I'm leaning toward the Canon 100/2.8 macro (not "L" and no IS).
I read a review claiming it has no CA wide open...

I should say that the reason I am moving on from my Micro-Nikkor 100 2.8 is that it's gotten quite stiff, has a tiny piece of cement (?) floating in the lens. It still performs well but with the cost of fixing it, I could move up in quality.

dickb · Joined: 04 Apr 2008 Posts: 821

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

shapencolour · Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 270

For around 1000 USD you can get Zeiss ZF Makro Planar 100/2 (Nikon mount with no chip).It has some CA wide open,only 1:2 RR,no IS and is quite long at closest focusing distance,but your're getting a piece of magnificent glass that serves brilliantly as regular 100mm short tele too.My absolute favourite in this class.

I rate it higher than both the EF L IS 100/2.8 Macro and Micro Nikkor VR 105/2.8.

BTW:Your 105/2.8 Micro AIS is a superb lens.Canon 100/2.8 non IS is a very good lens too,but not as "interesting" as the Zeiss by means of IQ.

ForenSeil · Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.

Kram · Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR

I guess a lot of you are unfamiliar with me and what I shoot. Allow me to explain. Smile

Here's one from today. Zeiss 60/2.8 M-P:

I consider myself somewhat skilled at hand holding. That said, some days are better than others. I shoot all macro work exclusively with manual focus lenses. I am a 30+ year pro.

The reason why I was contemplating the Canon 100/2.8 was not for the autofocus. Works very poorly with the "L IS" version for macro. The reason was sharpness and cheaper price, plus reviews say there is very little CA wide open. The 100/2.8 L IS was way too large and uncomfortable for me to use regularly. It was very sharp and I had heard that the non-IS, non-L version was the same formula. More fool me! I did not realize that the diameter of the non-L 100mm was wider. Thanks for that! Maybe I'll rent one and see if I like it.

The reason I prefer a smaller diameter lens is that I find that with the smaller barrel, I am able to hand-hold the lens more securely. Everyone is built differently so this may not matter to some.

Here's an image I shot with the Canon 100L IS (f/5.6 @ 160th, 100 ISO, hand-held):

Here's one from my Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8 (f/4 @125th, ISO 100, hand-held):

I can always just have the M-N 105 re-lubed but I was hoping for a lens with less CA wide open and perhaps a tad sharper.
I normally do not shoot much at 1:1 but a lot at 1:2.

Thanks everyone for your suggestions! I plan on investigating them all. Much appreciated.

I can't afford over $1000 and I know the Voigtlander 125 is rare and spendy.
Shocked

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7588 Location: Hong Kong

A tripod ring to the Canon 100 macro may help you to hold the lens.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Tripod-Mount-Ring-D-Review.aspx

Kram · Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR

shapencolour · Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 270

You're really getting superb results in shallow dof macro photography as can be seen from the samples above.100/2 Makro Planar is just something for you IMO.Maybe it's worth waiting a little bit more time.For now any macro lens will shine in your hands. Very Happy

Mike Deep · Joined: 25 Oct 2008 Posts: 323 Location: Upstate New York

I shoot a lot of insects and spiders handheld at similar apertures and shutter speeds using the Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5. CA has been minimal with my copy.

Handheld and flashed:

Let's just say I like it enough that a second copy just landed on the shelf...

Pontus · Expire: 2016-08-25

If I were you I would try the Zuiko 90/2 but shoot it at 2.8 and regard that as wide open. The Zuiko is magic, there is an unreal liquid quality to the images it produces. Another option is the Tokina 90/2.5 which is very light and compact, perfect for handheld shooting. Both options would suit you well. Of the modern alternatives the Sigma 150 has a stellar reputation, but it is a bit long for handheld shooting I think.

bernhardas · Expire: 2017-05-23

edited

Basilisk · Joined: 21 Mar 2013 Posts: 356 Location: UK

Kram · Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR

dickb · Joined: 04 Apr 2008 Posts: 821

I'd say get

A a Zuiko 90/2 if you can find one at a decent price.
B Failing that, the Tokina 90/2.5 seems to fit your size/weight bill at 530g.
C a Tamron 90/2.8 VC, a much better option in the modern category than the Canon non-IS. 550g, stabilised, relatively cheap, very sharp, good CA control. It does use more plastics in its build, so it doesn't quite have the nice metal feel to it of A and B.

BTW Two good 100mm macro lenses that haven't been mentioned before are the Leica Apo-Macro-Elmarit-R 100 f/2.8 at 760g and the Zeiss Contax Makro-Planar 100/2.8 at 740g. The Leica is rarely found under a $1000 though. I see you've got a Contax 60mm, if you like its rendition you may appreciate the 100mm Contax as well. Not too great on the CA front though.

Just to be more complete I'll also mention the Contax 100/4 bellows lens, a very good lens I don't use often enough as I like the minimal DoF you get at wider apertures. And the 105/4 Apo Rodagon N, which makes a nice little package combined with a short helicoid and the Olympus macro tube.

Kram · Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR

Thanks for these very good suggestions, Dick!

I will check them all out. I do love the Zeiss 60/2.8, and I do think I'd like the rendering of the Zeiss Contax Makro-Planar 100/2.8.

I love this about the Tamron 90/2.8 VC : "The rounded 9-blade aperture retains a nearly circular shape even when taken two stops down from its fully open state and offers attractive out-of-focus background effects."

Pontus · Expire: 2016-08-25

The Tokina 90/2.5 is legendary for its bokeh, if that's what you're after. You should seriously consider getting one, especially as they can be found cheaply with a bit of luck.