So I finally upgraded to the Canon EOS 90D and Im super excited to start shooting macro! I want to get close-ups of insects and tiny flowers in my backyard here in Oregon, and maybe take it on a hiking trip next month. My budget is around $600 max.
I did some digging online and saw a lot of people recommending the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro lens. It looks amazing but it stretches my budget a bit, even used. Then I saw the Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD macro which is way cheaper and apparently has incredible stabilization.
My logic was that the Tamron might actually be better for handholding. But then I got stuck thinking about the crop sensor on the 90D. Since it is a 1.6x crop, that 100mm is gonna act like a 160mm, and the 90mm will be like 144mm. Is that going to be too long to shoot handheld without getting blurry shots? Some forums say the crop factor is great for extra reach on bugs, but others say it makes camera shake way worse.
Which one should I go with for the 90D sensor? Or is there another lens I missed?
You might want to consider the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro. Make sure to:
- Shoot at 1/250s minimum
- Use a flash for bugs
> Then I saw the Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD macro which is way cheaper In my experience, you don't need to pay the L-series tax. I used the non-L Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM for years on crop bodies and the results were stellar. My advice: buy that or the Tamron used, and spend the leftover cash on a cheap speedlight and diffuser. Flash is what actually freezes bug movement, not stabilization.
> Since it is a 1.6x crop, that 100mm is gonna act like a 160mm, and the 90mm will be like 144mm. Is that going to be too long to shoot handheld without getting blurry shots? Honestly, you are hitting on a massive point that tons of beginners get tripped up on. Over the years, I've shot macro on both crop and full-frame bodies, and I can tell you that the crop factor is actually a massive blessing for bugs because you get that extra working distance. You dont have to get right in their faces and scare them off. But here is the big warning: do not rely too much on image stabilization. Many people think having stabilization means they can easily shoot macro handheld at slow shutter speeds. In my experience, stabilization only helps with up-and-down or side-to-side shake. It does absolutely nothing for the back-and-forth movement of your own body. At macro distances, your depth of field is literally paper-thin. If you lean in even a millimeter, your subject is out of focus, and stabilization wont save you. If you're shooting handheld in your backyard, you'll want to bump your shutter speed way up, like 1/250s or faster, and probably use a flash. I've tried many setups, and a cheap diffuser with a speedlight will do way more for your sharpness than the lens stabilization. Let me know if you want some tips on setting up a cheap DIY diffuser, I can easily show you how to build one.
