canon 100mm f2.8l vs 60mm f2.8 I have the t1i and want a great macro lens. the majority of my photography is macro, so i decided to invest in the L series 100mm macro, basically the best macro lens you can buy. however, i am now wondering if the lens is worth the cost. i want (really want. drooling over) the best of the best, not the 60mm, but maybe this cheaper lens is all i need. i need some help deciding whether i should buy the 60mm now or save up a little longer for the 100mm.
asked by phil barlow on February 10, 2011
Sort: Most Helpful first | Newest first | Oldest first
Showing 1-2 of 2 answers
Hopefully, you've already made your decision since the prices of both lenses has gone up significantly.

I have these two lenses and both lenses are incredibly sharp. The 60mm's IQ in many respects is indistinguishable from the 100mm's. The build quality of the 60 is very nice as well although it isn't weather sealed.

The two main advantages the 100mm brings to the table are IS--which would be of limited value with the 60mm--, and length--the extra 40mm means you don't need to get as close to those creepy crawly critters. IS doesn't add much for shorter focal lengths. A lot of macro shooters claim IS doesn't matter regardless because they always shoot with a tripod. I shoot with a tripod only when I have to (I'm stubborn). Thus, I do like it on the 100mm. I really see the value when I switch to my 135L. The shake is quite obvious and would be just a bit better for the 100mm without IS.

The added length is indisputably worthwhile. However, you have to determine whether these benefits are worth paying 2.5 times the price.
Gatorowl answered on March 28, 2011

Like Gatorowl, I owned both these lenses. I bought the 60mm almost immediately after I got my T2i a couple of years ago, and can honestly say I _love_ that lens. I don't have it any more, however, because I love my 100mm L more. :)

Gatorowl pretty much broke down all the pros and cons, so it's really a matter of whether you can justify the extra money for the 40mm and the IS. If you can't make that happen, I feel confident you'd be happy with the 60mm if you're really into macro. One other minor consideration is if you get the 60mm and later upgrade to a full-frame camera body, you wouldn't be able to use it, whereas the 100mm is an EF so it'll work with any Canon bodies.

That's my $.02 anyhow, do with it what you will.
Eugene Jones answered on January 4, 2013
‹ Previous   1   Next ›