DSLR Macro Lens Opinions Please

I downsized this from the original 2100px to post here. Canon 450D with Canon 100mm Macro. Any questions?

I have no experience with competing macro lenses. I need none. This lens has no better, in my humble opinion. I shoot using Canon's Zoom Browser software, tethered to the computer. Everything is done from the keyboard, and the lens autofocuses nicely with raw coins. Only with slabbed coins do I have to resort to manual focus, and even then only occasionally.

With any longer lens, you will run into difficulty getting the camera far away enough from the coin to keep it in the frame. The 100mm requires a minimum of about 15" relief to keep a Morgan dollar in the frame.

100% crop, pushing the minimum distance a little:



It almost renders a microscope unnecessary.

I am, therefore, unqualified to answer your question, as I will never have experience with a competing Macro lens.

With all I've just said, it bears mentioning that the Tamron is a formidable lens, capable of stunning results. The Sigma is no slouch, but if you're gonna go over the top, go all the way.

I believe the Canon still outshines it. The Tamron's minimum focal length is 18.5 inches; I do not know how this plays in the real world, except that there will be cases where the coin needs to be on the floor. The Canon's similar spec is 12", and I cheerfully push that limit in my daily shooting.

You own a Canon, EEW. Buy the Canon. The L model is no better optically; its' advantage is IS, which is irrelevant in this arena.

Wow, great detail!
The DSLR companies spend the most $ on R&D for optics--and have a slight advantage.
The main advantage with second-tier lens companies is a decent gear for a $ savings.

Well! OK Dave! hahaha That shot of the Lincoln is just perfect! As a Lincoln lover, I'd get that coin sealed up though - looks like it is going brown, albeit a very attractive brassy type of golden brown. Presuming that shot is of a raw coin? OK enough drooling over your penny.

Would you mind? Could you post all the camera specs (shutter, aperture, ISO) plus a picture of your lighting set up at the angles/positions to get that shot? You captured luster with out sacrificing any detail. Perfectly consistent outline/contrast of the bust. Your lighting angle/intensity was perfected for that shot.

Do you find yourself moving lights around often when certain pennies just won't light up the same as that 1910? You are right, it doesn't get any better than that! Ok I am convinced that the Canon 100mm will improve my photos to a level I will be happy with, especially since both of our cameras have the same sensor (22.2 x 14.8)and relatively the same image size (mine=3888 x 2592 vs 4272 x 2848=yours).

Ok for side by side study, the 1911 is raw, the 1910 is yours, the 1909 is slabbed - the first pic captures the luster, the second one looks lit from a similar angle as your image.. I resized these images to be the same size.












One difference I noticed was Pixel Density





22.2 x 14.8



I don't want to go off topic in this thread, however I am adding this note and link as a reminder for further photography discussion and study. Pixel Density http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key...el%20density

these friggggging goosenecks are hard, nearly impossible to get....
Super Dave, what is your WB setting with these..? Most certainly NOT auto...

All seriousness aside, my 450D prefers a Custom setting against pure white more than grey; even with 100w of Halogen light and a 40mm FOV, the light across the white balance test shot varies on 18% grey because my halogens are pretty tightly focused, being Spots rather than Floods. A few layers of printer paper presents a much more homogeneous backdrop.

Thank you, but I can't say that I've had my work published. You, however, are The Man.

I would go for the Canon. I have everything Canon and I love them.