Budget jewelry lens worth it?

Photoform · Jul 26, 2013

Ok, well I am considering buying a new lens for some product photography (rings). It seems from reading some older threads that a Canon 100 Macro is good. I saw a few here or there mentioned.

My question is... do you get what you pay for, and what how low of a budget for such a lens should one set as a minimum invest?

Right now, I'm using the kit lens. I also have some macro tubes. It's "okay" IMO.

Thank you.

Derrel · Jul 26, 2013

The older, Canon 100mm f/2.8 EF USM Macro, the internal focusing model that came out before the new, L-series, IS model, has rather harsh, 7-sided bokeh signature on specular highlights and points of light...because of that, it doesn't look all that "pretty". I have owned this lens for eight years, and that is the biggest weakness of the lens; whenever you want to create a pretty picture, with out of focus "bokeh balls", the lens renders them with sharp sides, and the bokeh looks...a bit ugly.

A lens that does better is the Tamron 90 AF-SP...it just has prettier bokeh rendering.

Overread · Jul 26, 2013

A Sigma 70mm f2.8 macro is also worth looking into - the working distance (distance between the front of the lens and the subject) is less, but for indoor jewellery work you often don't need much working distance to take the shot.

That said any 60mm to 105mm macro lens would suit your needs, the prime (single focal length) macro lenses on the market from Tamron, Tokina, Sigma and Canon are all high quality optics and certainly able to perform very well. The differences are smaller but still valid (as the point about the aperture blades mentioned above) but the performances are on the top level (macro lenses are generally very high quality optics these days - with the exception of hte macro "zoom" lenses like 70-300mm macro lenses which are budget options where its not "true" macro)