02-11-2020, 06:53 PM
User Info
For product photography, a fast nifty-fifty is all you need. A macro is overkill for that purpose.

36 1,975
 02-12-2020, 08:21 PM
User Info
Lovely colours.  Thumbsup

92 21,303
 02-13-2020, 11:14 AM
  • Mel S Meles
  • On the edge, ouch
  • 44.4899° south of the North Pole
User Info
(11-16-2013, 11:09 PM)wingdo Wrote: Also to look at would be Tamron's pair of Macro lenses they have a 60mm/f2.0 (yes 2.0 not 2.8) w/o IS, and a 90mm/2.8 WITH IS.

Here's a review from a site I highly trust:

Same site's review of the Canon one mentioned by others:

As you can see, both get a highly recommended (very few lenses manage this marking from them) but the optics of the Tamron actually edge out the Canon.

I have the Tamron 60 mm f/2.0 Macro mounted on my APSC sensor DSLR, which gives me a field of view that is equivalent of 93 mm in full frame (the nominal 60 mm of the lens is actually somewhere between 61 mm and 62 mm).  BTW, when used for very close up (approaching 1:1) shots, the actual maximum aperture of the 60 mm Tamron macro is about f/2.2; that is an artifact that is common in many macro lenses; at focusing distances of a foot or more the Tamron has a true f/2.0 maximum aperture.  In addition to the bright speed, two other features of the Tamron are really nice when you are using the lens:  it has internal focusing, so the front element of the lens does not shoot out as you get closer, where it could disturb the subject; and the focus is continuous.  Many macro lenses need to switch modes as one goes from merely close-up to true macro.  As for the optical performance, I cannot fault it in any way.  

While I have the floor, I want to give a plus-one to the posts that recommend NOT cheaping out on the support system for the camera.  There are huge differences in performance among "tripods" (which I put in quotation marks, because no tripod stands alone; it is part of a complete system).  That said, if the surface a tripod will be resting upon is flat and not subject to vibration (footfalls on plank floors, for instance), then, if you are going to save pennies in the purchase of a support system, a ballhead in the 90th percentile of performance mounted on a tripod that is in the 25th percentile of performance will be much more useful than a ballhead in the 25th percentile of performance mounted on a tripod in the 90th percentile of performance.  Since I bought my first serious camera (an SLR that came with a 58 mm f/1.4 lens) in the mid-1960s, I have bought several -- some might say many -- tripods in a series of upgrades.  But, once I reached the level of a Manfrotto 290 series tripod, and had used it for a while, my thirst for any further upgrade to the tripod was sated, and my acquisition disorder was cured on that front.   (Analogous to my  feeling after upgrading to a Semogue badger shave brush.)  I no longer lust for an RRS (Really Right Stuff) tripod.

That Manfrotto tripod (which I bought USED/MINT off eBay) came with an included and pretty decent Manfrotto ballhead and QR (Quick Release) clamp; the ballhead was better than the ballhead that I had been using up to that time, and I very quickly came to appreciate the worth of a QR clamp, and became addicted to attaching my camera to the tripod that way.   Still and all, the Manfrotto ballhead was merely adequate, and was clearly outclassed by the tripod it was attached to; so, within a year or two, I upgraded to a wonderful silky feeling, intuitive Markins Q10i ballhead.  That ballhead, however, which, also, I bought used, was not cheap; it cost an order of magnitude more by itself than the Manfrotto tripod+ballhead+clamp had cost me.  Costly as it was, the Q10i remains one of the best photographic investments I ever have made and did I mention that it's RED?)   Initially, I attached the Manfrotto QR clamp to which I had become addicted to the new Q10i ballhead, moving the Manfrotto ballhead over to my lightweight Sirui carbon fiber monopod, where it has saved me some bodily contortions when I use the Sirui to stabilize a compact (Fujifilm X10) camera.  

But the Q10i's ability to put into the shade any other components it is attached to (or the components attached to it) remained.  Atop the Q10i, the Manfrotto QR clamp was as outclassed as the Manfrotto ballhead that the QR clamp formerly had been attached to had been outclassed by the Q10i.   It was not long before I replaced the QR clamp with a Sunwayfoto/* Arca-Swiss clamp that gives me a greater sense of security when I have the monster DSLR attached to it than I ever had had when the big camera was attached by the QR clamp.  
     /*  (Our friend Wegian Warrior might be interested that the Sunwayfoto Arca-Swiss clamp that I purchased later was the centerpiece of patent litigation brought by Really Right Stuff, a civil action that Sunwayfoto lost.  Fortunately, the settlement in that litigation did not require Sunwayfoto to recall the now-stipulated-to-be-infringing Arca-Swiss clamps that already had been sold to photographers like me.)

1 1,409
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)