Best Lens for small product photography

[crabbos]

I recently bought an EOS R8 and am loving it. It came with the decent 24-50mm lens but that doesn't get close enough for my product photos (mostly earphones - think watch face or jewellery size). I can't decide between the RF 85mm F2 macro, 100mm F2.8 macro and 24-105mm F4. The zoom would be convenient but I'd like to be able to blur out the background a bit more so I'm not sure if F4 is wide enough.

I'd like to know if the 85mm would be sufficient (because F2 vs F2.8 and it's considerably cheaper), or should I go for the 100mm?

[p4pictures]

The key characteristic of a macro lens is the magnification or reproduction ratio. A lens that can achieve 1:1 or life-size is able to capture a subject measuring 36mm x 24mm (1 1/2 inch x 1 inch) and it completely fill the frame of the 26mm x 24mm sensor in your EOS R8. If your subjects are indeed larger then you don't need that 1:1 ratio, but if smaller you need more than 1:1.

RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM can manage 1:2 ratio, about 1/2 life-size. So suited for subjects at least 72mm x 48mm.

RF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM can manage 1.4:1 so good for a subject that is smaller than the 36mm x 24mm image sensor of your camera.

RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM is not a macro lens, it's maximum magnification is close to 1:4 so not ideal for the smaller sized subjects.

As to background blur, depth of field depends on a couple of factors; image sensor size, aperture value and distance to subject. When the distance to the subject is small and less than 1-ft / 30cm away from the camera  depth of field is minimal already even at f/8!

RF85mm F2 Macro US STM 

RF100mm F2.8 L MACRO IS USM 

[ebiggs1]

"I'd like to know if the 85mm would be sufficient ..."

What you need before you buy a new lens is to get DPP4 from Canon. It is a free d/l. You just might be surprised how much a post editor can do. Whether you than decide you do need another lens you will still utilize DPP4 if you want the best images possible. All great images go through post editing.

Getting close will bring on its own set of issues to overcome, if DPP4 can do the job it is a better path forward. It is common for everybody to look to gear, lenses, as the problem when it may not be the gear but how. Try DPP4 first.

[DougsGraphics]

Another relatively inexpensive option to consider is extension tubes. Adding an extension tube between the camera and the lens you already have will reduce the close focus distance and increase the magnification your current lens can achieve  with minimal loss of light. I don't think Canon has released any RF extension tubes yet, but I see lots of aftermarket versions available. A tube length matching the lens focal length will generally produce a 1:1 macro at the closest focus distance. 

[FloridaDrafter]

---

@crabbos wrote:

I'd like to know if the 85mm would be sufficient (because F2 vs F2.8 and it's considerably cheaper), or should I go for the 100mm?

---

Great advice from Brian and EB!

I went with the RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro. I have both the EF and RF versions of this lens. It's the only true macro in the Canon RF line-up, even though Canon liberally applies "Macro" to several of it's lenses. Technically, they aren't wrong as, by definition, it just means "close". Sensor size and post editing can get nice "closeups" with these lenses, but they are lacking in several categories.

The rub with these half life size (1:2) "macro" lenses is that a true macro lens is more than just a 1:1 (or smaller) reproduction ratio. They are designed differently to correct for various lens distortions brought on by being really close to your subject, hence they are more expensive. True, you can use a lens profile, which Canon provides in DPP, but it won't cover all of the bases like a designed macro lens does. And yes, you can use extension tube(s) with any lens to get 1:1 or greater, but you still have an uncorrected image and must rely on lens profiles. As with tele converters, extension tubes are no match for the proper lens. I have several [extension tubes] in my bag, and that's where they stay 🙂

As for f/2 over f/2.8? It won't make any difference, particularly if you have proper lighting. FWIW, for my staged macro and focus stacked sessions, I use a couple of 10" LED panels with diffusers.

Obviously, this all depends on what you are happy with or what you are willing to accept to stay within your budget. I totally understand, been there.

Newton

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

Good advice from everyone. I went with the RF100 f2.8 as well.