Macro 100 vs 180mm

Home Photography Forums General Photo Chit Chat Macro 100 vs 180mm

This topic contains 4 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Rob Wood (Admin) 2 years, 11 months ago.

  • Author
  • #259586

    Jeff Horton

    Another Macro has been on my list for some time. Close to making the purchase and looking at the options. I had a 100mm when I shot film years ago and I remember sometimes wishing for a longer lens. I had a 80-210 zoom that would close focus not not true macro but I used it a lot of the time.

    Just torn between the two but I am leaning toward the 180mm(+/-) range. I have used a set of extension tubes on a zoom and the extra distance is really nice. Anyone have one and regret it? BTW I don't do portraits, so that is not an issue.

  • #259975

    Kent DuFault

    If macro work is a primary part of your photography, I would go with a prime lens versus something with extension tubes. I make this statement because of the light loss with extension tubes and the superior focus of a prime lens. I couldn't really tell, from your statement, if you were talking about a prime 180mm macro focusing lens. If that were the case, then I think it is simply preference. I've never used a lens like that. The 100mm macro is an awesome lens and quite versatile.

  • #260000


    I'd go for the 100mm as it can double up better as a portrait lens.

  • #260018


    I use a 100mm Macro, and I can't fault it, it's a really good lens.

  • #260052

    I love my 60mm macro for both macro and portrait. 🙂

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.