>> |
BlackAdder
!!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>93515
I've used the 60mm macro for a while and it's certainly impressive to my eyes. Optically, it's just as good as the other macro lenses in the Canon range and the build quality is also very good for a consumer lens. Unless you really need weather sealing to match a weather sealed body it's fine. As a plus the 60mm front element doesn't rotate or move at all. They've not cut back on the quality of the glass for these crop body lenses, it would seem.
I like the lighter lenses, especially for macro work outside where I can get tired easily if I have to hold a longer and heavier lens steady. If I have to hike and hand hold for miles or in the cold then weight is an issue. The only thing I'd consider the longer ones for right now is more sensitive subjects like dragonflies, but it's not impossible to use the 60mm if you are patient enough.
I recently got the 17-55 and I'm pretty impressed with it so far. It was a toss up between that and the 17-40. Early days, lack of time and terrible weather and lighting has limited my use of it, but it's living up to everything I've read so far. Build quality feels solid enough, on a par with and a similar look to the the 60mm macro and I believe the 50mm 1.4 too. It doesn't feel flimsy or loose like the 50mm 1.8 or the 18-55 kit lens. The IQ isn't lacking either. A lot of the test shots from it are very pleasing. If Canon had given it the full weather sealed case, lens hood and pouch it could have been an L lens (much the same for the 60mm macro).
|