The 200 is my most used lens - the reach is important but in addition, the narrow angle of view lets you control the background much better. You are looking at a smaller 'slice' with it, and it's easy to shift an inch or two and totally change the background. It's also easier to get a clean background. I usually wind up using it even for copy work, like when I'm photographing prints for slides. The 200 give me a lot more room to set up lighitng etc, even when shooting an 8x10 or 11x14 inch print.
I only use a 50mm for specialized purposes (like very high magnification with the lens reversed) and in cases when I want more background in the shot - like floral shots where you want a sense of the other flowers in the field or garden, or ornaments on an Xmas tree. In those cases it's nice to be able to set the subject in a context, and the 50mm lets you put more background in the picture.
A 100 is the best compromise of reach, price, and angle of view. You can also get a faster 100mm (an f2.8) and it's easier to get to high magnification via extension - it's not terribly unwieldy to add 50mm of extension to a 100mm macro to get 1.5x life-sized. You also avoid some of the perspective distortion hat you can get with close-ups with a 50mm. (But - those perspective distortions can be an aesthetic element that you want as well...)
Anyhow - there are lots of good 100mm macros out there. Find one that is relatively fast - like an f2.8. If you add extension, or if the lens uses an extension based focusing system, you loose light as you focus in. This can get to be significant if you want to work at 1.5x or 2x magnification.
The AF vs MF question is also one to think through. If you plan on using the lens for general purpose shooting, AF may be important. If you want to do quality close-up work, you will need to figure out the DOF of your subject and select a focal plane that will allow you to capture what you need to get sharp. And, if you are chasing moving subjects (like bugs) trap focus might be a better option than AF (trap focus is where you put a manual focus lens on the camera, set the camera to auto focus, and then the shutter will only fire when something is in focus on the center sensor. Note that this works only with the center sensor, no matter how many AF sensors the camera has.)
I bought a Kiron 105 f2.8 for just over $100 many years ago. It's a real workhorse and does a great job. It is reputably the same lens as the old Vivitar Series 1 100mm f.2.5. the Pentax A 100 f2.8 macro is reputedly a great lens, but you are getting close in price to a 200mm. Otherwise, for an AF lens I'd look for an F/FA 100 f2.8, or Sigma 100 (105?) EX - the latter recommendations based just on reviews I've read, not on hands on experience.
- MCC
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, MI
www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 3:23 PM
Subject: Which Macro lens do you like the most?
I'm looking to buy a macro lens, again. Used to have one but now anymore. Long story. Which lens do you like to use most often for macro pics, the 50mm or the 100mm? I lean a little towards the 50mm since it will be cheaper, however, having the extra reach might be useful. I will be using the lens on a digital and film bodies if it makes a difference.
Thanks, Chad
