At 2:47 PM -0800 2/17/05, John Chennavasin wrote:

On Thursday, February 17, 2005, at 12:57PM, Bill Gillooly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


But the EF-S 60mm f2.8 isn't wider than 50mm :-(

I wasn't implying that the 60 is wider than the 50, it's wider than the 100!

          50mm x 1.6 = 80mm and
          60mm x 1.6 = 96mm

Apparently the need for a 100mm equivalent is very important to this
market and 80mm doesn't cut it.

Was there any word on price, maybe it's cheaper.  Since this is an EF-S
lens, it is possible that it is specially corrected for the needs of the
APS-C sensor size.

I'm still surprised that the Canon 60 macro is an EF-S lens, considering that Nikon has a 60/2.8 macro (although theirs is bigger and isn't internal focus). Would have been nice if it had 58mm filter to match the 100 macro USM.


Someone will need to confirm this, but I suspect the effective focal length of the 60mm macro at 1:1 is shorter than the 50/2.5 macro due to the internal focus mechanism. This behavior is present on the 180/3.5 macro.

Exactly! this is one of the reasons I don't care for internal focus that much for macro lenses, except possibly the longest ones.


Part of the reason for the 100/2.8 USM being so large is that it allows a very complex focussing mechanism which doesn't reduce the focal length as much. The 60, due to it's compact size, won't have that option.

At this point my preference would be for the 50/2.5. USM as such isn't a big deal for me on a macro; the likelihood of vignetting is less in a lens designed to cover 35mm FF, and at closest distance (1:2 for the 50), its working distance is not going to be much different than that of the 60. Also, on APS-C you also gain for macro work because now 1:2 means 45x30, not 72x48, so you can fill the frame with a smaller field at the same magnification compared with 35mm film.

Also, for certain types of copy work and other medium magnification flat field work, a shorter focal length lens is preferable. At present I use a 55 Micro-Nikkor with adapter on my Canon, but a 50/2.5 would be preferable.

--
   *            Henning J. Wulff
  /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
 /###\   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to