Ednsb Loc: Santa Barbara

Any ideas?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

They are all GOOD. Your exact use will determine which attributes are more/most important.
.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Are you asking for all types of macro, live subjects and static like coins and flowers? It matters because the EF-S 60mm macro is amazingly sharp, but a little short for working with live / skittish subjects. In the 100mm range, Canon has both IS and non-IS versions. If you have a good tripod already, the non IS version is everywhere as sharp. Either lens purchased used might give you options for one over the other as the non IS and non-L version requires separate purchases for the hood and tripod collar.

You might look at your current lenses and macro aspirations and decide an extension tube gets you close enough without a dedicated lens, especially if just starting out and wanting to experiment in general. A tube like the EF 25 II will work with all your EF and EF-S lenses, and is always handy to have in your kit, even if you have a dedicated macro.

Consider a flash too.

Ednsb Loc: Santa Barbara

Static images prefer full-frame lens as I will be moving to that format in the next year. Is is important as I don’t have the steadiest hands anymore (71). I've done macro before with film but sold that lens so it's been a while. I would prefer to keep the price down.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Balance the lens price with additional needs like a tripod, wired shutter release, and / or external flash. Take all the suggestions and look at EX / EX+ rated used lenses at KEH.com.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM is great! it's the older version and less expensive Canon 100mm ($600), but still in production and widely available new and used.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM is also excellent, but it's more expensive (~$750). The L has image stabilization, but it doesn't do a whole lot at macro magnifications.

Both Canon 100mm have good USM focus drive. Both are internal focusing or "IF"".... meaning they don't grow longer when focused closer (some macro lenses are not IF and extend *a lot*, cutting down on working distance which is already pretty minimal).

One of the great things about the two Canon 100mm macro lenses is that they can optionally be fitted with a tripod mounting ring... a really nice accessory to have since a lot of macro shooting is done with a tripod or at least a monopod. No other 90mm, 100mm, 105mm macro lenses I'm aware of are able to be fitted with a tripod ring (150mm, 180mm and 200mm usually come with one... the ultra high magnification Canon MP-E 65mm also comes with one). The Canon Tripod Ring B (black version, $150) that the less expensive, non-L/non-IS lens uses is also used on two other macro lenses, as well as one or two non-macro, is widely available both new used. Plus some third party manufacturers make cheaper "clones" of it. The Tripod Ring D ($172) is exclusive to the EF 100mm L IS lens, as of now. There are also third party clones of it that cost less.

Both the Canon 100mm are very well built. With the L, that's to be expected. The less expensive non-L/non-IS version is an older style, but is identical in build to the Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L USM... an L-series lens. The only reason the non-L lens isn't an L is because it doesn't use any "exotic glass" to make great images. (Canon's criteria for a lens to qualify for L status is that it must... 1. be "cutting edge" materials and design, 2. work on all Canon EOS cameras past, present and future and, 3. use specialty lens elements in its optical formula. The 100mm USM lenses qualifies for #1 and #2, but not for #3.)

Both those lenses have a focus limiter, too. This is used to help speed up focusing in some situations, by restricting the lens' range of focus. The older lens has a simple two stage (full and non-macro distances). The L/IS version has a bit more sophisticated three stage limiter (full, non-macro only and macro only).

The L/IS lens comes with a matched lens hood (most L-series do). The non-L/non-IS lens' hood is pretty large and is sold separately (as are most Canon non-L lens hoods). The Canon ET-67 it uses costs $35. There are cheaper third party clones of the hoods for both lenses (not needed for the L, unless the supplied one is lost or damaged).

The non-L/non-IS lens uses 58mm filters and has a ridge on the front barrel that allows Canon macro flash such as the MT-24EX, MT-26EX Twinlites and MR-14EX Ringlites to be directly fitted. The L-series 100mm is larger diameter, uses 67mm filters, and requires a separately sold 67mm Macrolite Adapter to fit the Canon macro flashes. I don't know if there is any vignetting in images when using the adapter and flashes on the larger lens. (There are alternative ways to mount MT-24EX Twinlite, which I use with my 100mm and 180mm lenses. I only use the Ringlite with the ultra high magnification MP-E 65mm lens at magnifications approx. twice life size and higher. On that lens the direct mounting is possible and works fine without any adapter.)

100mm Macro lenses give you roughly 12" minimum focus distance (MFD). That's measured from the film or sensor plane of the camera, so some of that distance is occupied by the lens itself and part of the camera body. The the lenses' highest magnification (1:1 or life size), the actual working distance between the subject and the front of the lens (without hood or filters) is about 5.75" with the non-L/non-IS... and is slightly under 5" with the L/IS. It's interesting that the newer lens has noticeably less working distance.

The two Canon 100mm Macro lenses are similar size and fairly large (roughly 4.75" long and slightly over 3" diameter).

If you prefer a more compact lens, the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM is an excellent and less expensive alternative (~$350). As an EF-S lens it's only usable on crop sensor cameras, such as your T4i. It also is an IF design, is a little under 3" diameter (52mm filters) and about 2.75" long. The shorter focal length also means a shorter MFD... about 8"... which also means less working distance. At maximum 1:1 magnification, there's only about 3.5" between the subject and the front of the lens (without any hood or filter). As a non-L-series lens, it's hood is sold separately ($25 for the Canon ET-67B), but is a lot smaller than the hoods for the 100mm lenses (especially the non-L/non-IS version's large hood). The Canon MT-24/26EX and MR-14 Macro flash all can be fitted directly to the front of the EF-S 60mm lens. This lens doesn't have a focus limiter.

There also are:

Tamron SP 60mm f/2 Di II.... a full stop faster than most macro lenses making it more useful for other purposes such as portraiture. It's an IF design and reasonably compact, with roughly the same MFD and working distance as the Canon 60mm. It uses rather slower micro motor focus drive, which is fine for macro and portraits, but not fast enough for any sort of "action" photography. I t costs $500, uses 55mm filters and comes with a lens hood and a 6 year warranty.

Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8.... there are two versions available. A less expensive ($500) version is non IF, doesn't have image stabilization and uses a slower micro motor focus drive. A more expensive ($650) version is IF, has Tamron's "VC" image stabilization, and uses a faster "USD" ultrasonic focus drive. Both are good optically and have slightly under 12" Minimum Focus Distance. The non-IF lens increases in length considerably... grows 2" longer when focused to full 1:1 magnification. That makes for less working space (~3.5" w/o hood) than the IF version (just over 5" w/o hood). Both lenses come with a matched lens hood. The more expensive IF/VC/USD lens uses 62mm filters. The less expensive non-IF lens uses 55mm filters.

Tokina AT-X 100mm f/2.8... is one of the least expensive macro lenses at around $400. It is capable of making excellent images, like all the other macro lenses, but is a pretty basic design. It is not IF, so it grows almost 2" longer when focused to its maximum 1:1 magnfication... with just under 12" MFD, this leaves about 4" working distance (w/o hood). It also uses a rather slow micro motor focus drive and, like most (all?) Tokina, has an unusual "focus clutch" mechanism. You push the focus ring slightly forward or pull it slightly backward to engage or disengage autofocus. As a result, it only possible to manually focus the lens when shifted to the MF setting (the Canon USM and other lenses listed here all allow you to manually focus any time, handy for fine tuning macro shots or using a de-focus/re-focus technique). There is a new Tokina ATX-i 100mm f/2.8 that's a few dollars more expensive and looks a little different, but appears to have the same specifications as the older lens. I am unfamiliar with the new lens.

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM... used to be one of the most expensive macro lenses at around $970... but has been heavily discounted lately and is now among the least expensive at $469. It's a very full featured lens, too, with OS image stabilization, quicker HSM ultrasonic focus drive, a three-step Focus Limiter and more. One thing... it's not IF, so grows about 2" longer when focused to 1:1, ending up with about 4.5" working distance (w/o hood). It uses 62mm filters and comes with a matched lens hood.

Sigma 70mm f/2.8... has recently been re-introduced. They made one in the past, but discontinued it some years ago. I don't know much about this new version except that it's able to do full 1:1, has a nicely recessed front element (may not need to use a hood with it) and is selling for $469. (Any used ones are probably the old version... the new one hasn't been selling for very long, so I doubt many will show up used yet.)

There are some other macro lenses, but the above are the most popular and ones I recommend for a first/only macro lens. There are shorter focal length (50mm, 35mm, etc.), but those make for very little working distance. I mostly just recommend those for studio work. There are also longer (150mm, 180mm, 200mm) macro lenses, but those are a lot more difficult to hold steady and make for very shallow depth of field at high magnifications. For these reasons, I recommend a macro lens in the 60mm to 105mm range.

There are also some higher magnification lenses, such as the Canon MP-E 65mm.... That's able to do 5:1 or 5X life size. In fact, the *least* it can do is 1:1! It's a pretty high specialized lens, manual focus only, and pretty much requires a tripod and a stationary subject. Not a lens I'd recommend for most peoples' first/only macro lens.

Speaking of manual focus, there are a number of macro lenses without autofocus, too... both modern ones and vintage. A lot of macro shooters prefer to use manual focus techniques, but it may make the lens less useful for other, non-macro purposes.

If the prices for the above listed lenses new (listed) are more than you wanted to spend, most of them can be found used or refurbished (Canon USA sells refurbished lens via their website... they are little different from new and have the same warranty).

Have fun shopping!

photosbytw Loc: Blue Ridge Mountains

Note-Don't use a tripod with IS unless IS it is turned off..........Flash? Absolutely!

LarryFitz Loc: Beacon NY

Canon EF‑S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM. I purchase a refurb one from canon. Has built in ring light for macro shots. Also great a every day carry around lens.

Bison Bud

I have been very pleased with the performance of my Canon EFS 60mm, f2.8, USM lens. However, if you can swing the difference, I would recommend going with the 100mm version just to gain some working distance when needed. Not that I can't shoot close enough with the 60mm, but a little added range would be a plus in my eyes. In my opinion, money well spent either way, but the 60mm was affordable for me at the time of purchase and I will say that it's been worth the price overall.

Goober Loc: Southeastern PA

I have a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens for sale. Bought new and hardly used at all as I use Sony now.
Send me a PM if interested.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Canon has 2 100mm macro lenses that work very well. If you plan to hand hold it, then get the L series lens with IS. It's worth the extra $100.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

The EF 100mm f2.8 L IS would be the best for you from what you describe.
I have it and love it.

Ednsb Loc: Santa Barbara

Great review - Im pretty much looking at the Canon 100 non L.. have seen nothing but great reviews.

Straight Shooter Loc: Newfoundland, Canada

I have and like the Sigma 105mm, the OS version that I bought on Ebay. There is an older, non-OS version that you might find for less. The 105 is also quite useful as a short telephoto.

saxman71 Loc: Wenatchee

If it was me I would plop down the $469 for the Sigma 105mm, f/2.8 lens with optical stabilization. In my way of thinking that is a killer deal. Heck, I might just buy one even though I'm not really in the market for another macro lens.