rdubreuil Loc: Dummer, NH USA

I haven't run across a 180mm macro; what brand? True macro, not a lens in the guise of a macro oft quoted as having "macro mode" type of lens but; a one to one macro? On the long end I've only ever run across 90, 100, 105, 150 and 200mm lenses. I totally agree with you though on the retention of IQ with the longer lenses, and if you want closer than their minimum focal distances there's always extension tubes to get you closer.

I've got 3 macro/micro lenses myself, 60, 105 and 200. I've also got a couple of zooms with the afore mentioned "macro mode" and as expected they suck for macro work. As for the issue of APS-C/DX the OP mentions, it doesn't really factor in, when it comes to the crop of the sensor (1.5/1.6 etc.) it's field of view not magnification.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

I'm guessing you have never taken Macro shots at true 1:1 captures. To do this with your standard macro lens you must zoom the lens out to it's Closes working distance for a true 1:1 capture. With a 100mm lens your Working Distance for 1:1 is about 6 inches.. For a 60mm macro lens at 1:1 your working distance is about 4 inches. With all true macro lens when focused to the 1:1 working distance will give you the same detail, give or take just a hair on the DOF. One of the reasons the 100mm is favored is for it's working distance when compared to the shorter macro lens and it's weight when compared to the longer macro lens. Something else to consider is the closer the focusing distance the shallower the depth of field. The 100mm macro lens is a happy medium when compared to all the other choices..

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Robert ... I am aware of that ... however, Tamron and Sigma have made some pretty decent AP-Zs with the "macro" suffix attached ... most of which allow initialization of "macro" at any length. 1:1 it isn't, but, still ...

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Rdub ... Canon has a 180, as does Tamron, and Sigma ... Nikon jumps from 105 clear up to 200, though. I, too - have three REAL Macros - a Tokina 35 for my Nikons, a Tamron 60 f2 for my Canons, and a Sigma 105 for my Sony
... I need to find a decent one for each mount, in the other sizes, though ... still working on it. I also use "fake" macros ... a couple of Sigmas, and a Tamron ... these allow engaging Macro at any length, but they're not 1:1 ....

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Martin ... then a 100 Macro is the perfect solution all-around, is it? ....

I DO work with a Sigma 105 on some subjects, but I much prefer the Tamron 60 f2 as an all-purpose answer ...

I've used the Tokina 35 Pro DX in closer-up situations, but I've never been entirely happy with the results ...

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

I'm shooting 4/3rds using an older full frame Olympus 90mm f2 macro, 1/2 life size. On my 4/3rds camera, it is manual focus only and can only be used in aperture or manual modes. But because it is a full frame lense on a 4/3rds camera, it is equivalent to a 180mm life size macro lense. And it is sharp. It is one of my favorite lenses to shoot with even with the manual focus and mode limitations.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Sigma and Tamron both have 180 macros. I own a Tamron 180 F3.5 that recently went out of production.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

cthahn

Really do not know what you are talking about.

rdubreuil Loc: Dummer, NH USA

I hadn't seen any 180's advertised or reviewed only up to the 150's, then again I've only been shooting for less than 2 yrs. I have all Nikon and only one third party lens (Sigma 150-600) with F mount. I wish someone would come up with a Canon to f mount converter that doesn't disable functions to the camera as Canon has some really good glass too, my main interest would be the Canon 5:1 macro. For me it's a shame one can mount Nikon glass on a Canon body but not conveniently the other way round. Thanks for the clarification.

tdefraker

The Nikon 40 mmDx Macro is perfect for copying slides with the Nikon ES-1 slide holder.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

There are very few zooms that are true macro lenses and they are older film era designs that can only be found used and still costly. Most zooms with a macro function only allow you to focus closer. A true macro lens is also a "flat field" lens design. Sharp across the entire frame, not just the center. Macro is my niche (see my Flickr stream thru the link below my signature for examples) You would be better served to ask your macro questions in the "True Macro" section as there are more knowledgeable people there.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

I agree. The IQ is not affected, nor the perspective.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Canon's mount is a few mm wider than the other brands. It offers some advantages over the smaller mounts. But it is much easier to make a lens work properly with an adapter that steps down (Canon lens to Nikon mount) than one that steps up due to the problem with vignetting among other things.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

First, Sigma's 24mm and 28mm lenses weren't "true" macro lenses. They were just wide angles with a "macro" label, but didn't really get into macro magnifications. The shortest Sigma macro I'm aware of was a 50mm. They also made a 70mm macro for a while. Right now I think Sigma only makes 105mm, 150mm and 180mm macro lenses. All those are "DG" or full frame capable lenses.

Tokina's now-discontinued 35mm macro is a DX lens... crop only. It's like a 52.5mm on 1.5X croppers (i.e., Nikon) or 56mm on 1.6X (Canon). Tokina is now only offering 100mm macro (FX/full frame capable).

Canon has just recently introduced an EF-S (crop only) 35mm f/2.8 STM Macro lens (that's equivalent to 56mm on full frame... it's got IS too). And Canon long made 50mm macro lenses, too. Their recently-discontinued 50/2.5 "Compact macro" 1:2 has been around for a couple decades! They've just introduced a manual focus Tilt-Shift Macro 50mm f/2.8 (1:2, unless macro extensions are added), along with new TS-E Macro 90mm and TS-E Macro 135mm lenses. I've used their TS-E 45mm f/2.8 for close-up work for many years (if memory serves, it's actually only around 1:3 without extension tubes). Canon currently makes an EF-S (crop only) 60mm f/2.8 Macro offering full 1:1 in an Internal Focusing lens. They also offer two 100mm and a 180mm macro lenses, all "EF" or full frame capable. In addition, they offer the "super macro" MP-E 65mm which is manual focus with up to 5:1 magnification and no less than 1:1 (where most other macro lenses stop). Canon also offers a neat 24-70mm f/4L zoom that's just shy of 1:1.5 capable, if you prefer not to carry around an additional macro lens.

Nikon's Micro-Nikkor 40mm and 85mm f/3.5 are also DX (crop only) lenses, which respectively "act like" 60mm and 127.5mm would on full frame. Their shortest FX (full frame) lens is 60mm (1:1 two models... one IF and AF-S, the other non-IF and AF "D"), as well as a manual focus 55mm f/2.8 (1:2), PC-E 50mm f/2.8 and PS-E 85mm f/2.8 (manual focus perspective control tilt shift, 1:2). Their excellent 105mm f/2.8 and 200mm f/4 Micro-Nikkors are 1:1 and full frame capable FX models, too.

Tamron offers 90mm (two versions) and 180mm macro lenses, too... all full frame capable "Di" models. And they offer a crop only 60mm f2.0 "Di II". All of them can achieve full 1:1 magnification.

The shortest macro focal length available right now is the Venus Optics Laowa 15mm f4 Macro/Shift lens that's available in Canon, Nikon and Sony mount. It's a pretty specialized, manual focus macro lens. It can render greater depth of field than most macro lenses... but is pretty much only usable with inanimate subjects due to the extremely short working distance. Venus Optics also offers a manual focus 60mm f/2.8 for Canon, Nikon and Pentax that offers 2:1 or twice life size magnification, twice what most other macros are capable of on their own.

Zeiss also offers 50mm and 100mm macro lenses in various mounts. I think they are all manual focus.

So, sorry, but you are incorrect. There is no "dearth of short macro lenses". There are lots of them now available or manufactured until only recently and still easy to find. You do need to check if they are crop only or full frame capable, though. And, if needed, check if they can do full 1:1 or are limited to 1:2 (not that this should stop you... simply get macro extension tubes and use them with the lens to push it to higher magnification).

You are also incorrect.... Getting closer does not increase exposure! In fact, just the opposite is more common with macro. When really close to tiny subjects you can all-too-easily cast a shadow over them or just block part of the available light, making for greater difficulty with exposure. This is in addition to the risk of bumping inanimate, or scaring away shy live subjects, or even getting bit or stung by some of the less friendly ones!

The minimum focus distance (MFD) of a 50mm macro lens is around 6".... HOWEVER, you have to remember that's measured from the film/sensor plane of the camera and so part of the camera and the lens itself are occupying much of that space. The very front of the lens may be only an inch or two from the subject at full 1:1 magnification! A lens hood or lens-mounted flash might not even be usable.

90, 100 or 105mm gives more like 12" minimum focus distance.... a lot more reasonable although it's similar in that some of the MFD space is taken up by the lens and part of the camera.

Minimum focus distance for 180 to 200mm is around 18" to 20". But these longer focal lengths are a lot harder to hold steady for a shot. That's compounded because they also render super shallow depth of field and you're more likely to need to stop down further, requiring a slower shutter speed (and/or a higher ISO). 150mm, 180mm and 200mm macro lenses always include a tripod mounting ring for a reason... you're much more likely to need to use them with a tripod or at least a monopod. (AFAIK, among all the 105mm and shorter macros, only the two Canon 100mm lenses can be optionally be fitted with tripod mounting rings... which is something thing I really like about them! The ultra high magnification Canon MP-E 65mm also comes with a tripod ring.)

The Venus Optics Laowa 15mm can focus on something touching the front element of the lens! That was also the case when I used a short 12mm macro extension tube with my Canon EF 20mm f/2.8 wide angle lens, to use it for near-macro close-ups...


90, 100 or 105mm is actually a good compromise for most people for general purpose macro shooting: reasonable size, reasonably hand-holdable, with reasonable working distance, and lots oto choose among, all of which are able to make high quality images. There are affordable ones without a lot of extra bells and whistles (Tokina 100mm), expensive ones with everything imaginable (Micro-Nikkor 105mm), and everything in between. There are also literally millions of excellent, vintage, manual focus macro lenses on the used market.

Some folks feel "true" macro is 1:1 (full life size, meaning that on a full frame camera with a sensor that's 24x36mm you can photograph a 24x36mm object). Personally I always felt 1:2 qualified, too.... a lot of macro lenses in the past maxed out at half life size. Plus, many people shoot a lot of their images at "less than 1:1" with their macro lenses. Flowers, butterflies, yada yada.... are often done at considerably lower mag.