60mm vs 105mm macro

[seansrs968 10]

I have been shooting 60mm macro for awhile and I am wondering what advantage would be gained by going to a 105mm. I am also shooting on a Canon 7d so a 105mm would be around 168mm due to the crop sensor. Would love to hear other's opinions.

 

Sean

[Kenr 2]

the 100mm will give you more distance from your subject. the mfd on the 60 is 7.9" and 11.8 on the 11.8. Ultimately the 100mm can give you more magnification because you can add more diopter power then the 60 because of the greater working distance. The 100 will also have a shallower depth of field. For that reason the 100 is a little harder to focus. Sometimes you want a shorter focus distance because you can shoot through less water and still fill the frame. BTW Canon makes two 100mm macros no 105s

Ken

Edited January 31, 2013 by Kenr

[KirkD 7]

I'm a Nikon shooter and have both the 60 & 105. The 105 gives you more room in the way of working distance, which is good for skittish creatures and gives a sholler depth of field. Cons are that it tends to hunt and you will need a good focus light. I was used to shooting the 60 and then moved up to the 105. It took a little getting used to at first. One issue I had was I was used to getting right on top of something to shoot, well with the 105, I would get to close to focus and would have to back up a little. One comdo that I tried recently was the older 60 macro with a 1.4 tele. I really liked that combo. It focused faster than the 105 and gave me the option to shoot regular 1:1 macro or I could have moved in closer and got super macro. Having said that, I'm not going to be selling my 105 anytime soon. I think Cannon users have to put an extension ring between the lens and teleconveter to get it to focus. Not sure. Maybe one can chime in on that one.

[seansrs968 10]

Overall would you recommend going to a 100mm vs. 60? I am planning on going to Anialo this May.

 

Sean

[Glasseye Snapper 47]

Hi Sean,

 

I have both lenses and prefer the 100mm but it really depends on what you are interested in. If you like nudibranch, corals, or anything that you can get close to without spooking or stressing your subjects there is no real advantage to the 100mm as both can do 1:1 imaging. At the same time the 60mm is more broadly useful and able to take images of larger subject without having to back off as much as with the 100mm. So with the latter you are more locked into macro for the whole dive (or head shots of larger fish). Just ask yourself how often you would have liked higher magnification but simply couldn't get any closer. If that is something you want to address, get the 100mm, it is my underwater microscope and I never end being surprised by what there is to see.

 

Bart

[seansrs968 10]

Well when I go to Anialo it is a nudibranch site from what I gather and other small creatures. I am just trying to figure out if I should go with it.

[Deep6 7]

Well when I go to Anialo it is a nudibranch site from what I gather and other small creatures. I am just trying to figure out if I should go with it.

 

Both. Depends on the vis. and you may want the 60 for a night dive at Basura. I generally use the 105 on a DX camera and sometimes the 12-70. Depends on the site.

Bob

 

P.S. I like the 10-17 with 1.4 x TC in a mini dome port - w/a "macro"

Edited February 1, 2013 by Deep6

[Aquapaul 26]

I have both the 60 and the 105 and am a Nikon shooter. The 60 is by far more versatile the the 105 but they both have there uses. The 60 will focus without a focus light even with a Macromate close up filter quite reliably where as the 105 does okay on it's own in bright light but if you are shooting something dark colored or in a dark hole you will need a focus light for it and every time with a close up filter. People talk about having more working focus room with the 105 and there by better for shooting skittish subjects but I find that's not true if you have to use a focus light.

 

If you don't have a flip filter like the Macromate or the Subsea you may like that better then the 100 but I would get both and a focus light. I am sure you deserve it... ;-}

[elbuzo 8]

I went to Anilao inAMy 2011and used the 60mm on a cropped sensor DSRL most of the time ,combined with the macromate . Since there is a lot of particulate in the water , it's better to be real close of your subjects there . I get good results and din't use my 105mm at all .

 

Anilao is great for macro and must be one of the best places in the world for nudis. You can see some examples in my gallery from the trip : http://flickr.com/gp/jaalvarez/Za39n2

 

Good luck

Edited February 1, 2013 by elbuzo

[eric black 1]

two different lenses for two different purposes in my opinion- I use the 105 for macro with the occasional backoff to shoot something larger and hope that distance doesn't kill the image too much. I use the 60 for images larger than macro and dont seem to ever really use it to get close enough to even try for anything 2x frame size or smaller-just save those shots for the next dive. I find I have each on the camera about equally.

[John Bantin 101]

I liked the 60 best when I shot on DX but I had to get a 105 when I moved up to a big boy's camera!

[Longimanus1975 1]

I dont want to hijack the thread but I am in a similar situation, currently have the 60mm and was thinking about the 105mm.

 

I am trying to work out the pros and cons of getting a new 105mm lens or using something like a subsee diopter on the 60mm

 

whats peoples thoughts?

[ehanauer 37]

The 60 is a 90 on a crop sensor, and becomes a 112 behind a flat port.

[Alex_Tattersall 90]

Using a 105 doesn’t give you more magnification than a 60 Longimanus, it gives you more working distance. I found it useful for animal portraits where you want to give the animal a bit of distance.

 

I was in the water with a D7000 and a 105mm and my friend was in the same water with a 60mm and a 7D. We were both shooting these mackerel. Most of his shots were side on as the mackerel broke to swim past us but the extra length of the lens I had meant I could almost fill the frame with them front on

 

 

These damsels tend to duck into their coral heads if you get too close. Very difficult with a 60mm, easier with a 105mm

 

 

Same, fill the frame from a distance and don’t spook the fish

 

 

Again, very difficult to approach leopard blennies with a 60mm

 

 

This working distance is also necessary when using strong wet diopters like the SUbsee +10 otherwise you find yourself on top of the subject, with less magnification which makes lighting more difficult.

 

IMHO

[Longimanus1975 1]

Alex, thanks for the explanation, so could you use a +5 or +10 on a 60mm to almost replicate the 105mm working distance? Just trying to see if there is a cheaper/less weight option than purchasing the 105mm?

 

Stunning pics by the way!!!

Edited February 2, 2013 by Longimanus1975

[Aquapaul 26]

Close up lenses/ wet lenses give you less working distance. With a 60mm/Macromate combo it can be a challenge lighting your subject because your lens is very close. But even so I wouldn't dive without my Macromate attached on my 60mm because you never know what you might run across.

[onokai 18]

I have shot both lens for years and for me you need them both.

I love the 105 and will not leave home without it. The 60 stays in the bag more.

Folks above have covered all the bases-I suggest getting them both.

Mark

Edited February 3, 2013 by onokai

[Aussiebyron 57]

If your going to mostly be shooting Nudibranchs then you dont really need the extra working distance of the 100/105mm. If you want a little bit of extra focal range and increase in magnification a Teleconverter maybe the way to go. I believe with the 60mm Canon you need a 12mm extension tube with the TC to make it work......? All you have to do then is find a port to match the 60mm lens,extension tube and TC.

 

Here are few non edited non cropped shots with the Nikon 60mm and Kenko pro 300 1.4x TC.....which is my favourite macro setup at the moment.

 

 

Regards Mark

[JimSwims 31]

For me, shooting in temperate waters with DX the 60mm is my fave macro lens. It has more options with the addition of diopters

or magnifiers. I have found the 105mm to really excel with the addition of SubSee magnifiers allowing me to get super macro shots

or close ups of critters I couldn't do with the 60mm. My feeling is the greater working distance of the 105mm brings the element of

haziness to images not seen with the closer range 60mm. Of course however with some critters the 100/105mm is the only way to

get a shot at all.

 

Each lens has its strengths/applications and weakness/limitations.

 

Cheers,

Jim.

 

Edit- having said all that, I just checked and I haven't taken the 105mm of my camera except for two dives since Sept last year. Been

having too much fun exploring the strong points of the 105mm

Edited February 7, 2013 by JimSwims

[seansrs968 10]

Would the Subsea diopter be something to look into if using a 60mm on a flat port? In general how is the viz in Anialo? So right now I think I will hold off on the 100mm.

[E_viking 30]

The problem is that you would loose even more working distance adding a diopter on a 60mm.

I was generally preffering the 60mm on a DX. The 105mm was more of a special case for me.

If you want to use diopters. Then the 100/105 is the way to go

 

/Erik

[seansrs968 10]

So just stick to the 60mm with no diopter?

[the_dragon_no1 4]

Diopter on 60mm is no point in doing.

I had the 60, but returned it for a 105. As i found out it wasnt what i wanted for the very smal stuff.

 

Sendt fra Samsung Galaxy S2, via Tapatalk forum app.

 

 

[johnspierce 25]

A diopter can be useful on a 60 mm with an APC sensor camera.

 

60mm with 1.4 kenko TC and +5 Aquatica diopter.

Edited April 7, 2013 by johnspierce

[BigJeff 11]

I think the answer is now crystal clear - take both 60 and 105