Not only is it still in use with 60mm field of my old 50 / 1.8, it has at the same time with his 1: 1 magnification ratio and the same magnifying power as the 100 Macro however, for much cheaper. Clean on the paper so it could be a good and effective compromise between standard prime lens and Macro. But it is also in practice?
To make a long story short: Yes! With its 60mm it can be used as my old dignified 50 / 1.8 is quite. Well, you have just a tad bit further away from the subject (although even benefits for cropping has), rewarded the 60's but with an even better sharpness than the 50 / 1.8. Color and contrast are also even better - I've never had me, so just got pictures as they came directly from the camera. Also, the Bokeh is the 60s absolutely silky smooth and beautiful. Even the 50 / 1.4 is on test images not manage to connect these soft background. The only real disadvantage is the low light level of "only" 2.8 at 60. This should take into account who is instructed in extreme low-light conditions at high shutter speeds. However, with its 2.8 maximum aperture, the 60 immediately so knackscharf how the 50 prime lenses at the same aperture. For me, the 60s is now my new standard. So far so good. What does the '60s as a Macro?
Although the magnification power of 1: 1 is the same as the 100 - by the shorter focal length you have all 7 cm closer to the subject approach (1: 1 magnification at 100mm: 16 cm distance, 60mm: 9cm distance). Even the background arrives at 60mm focal length longer on the picture, which can make him restless. So who is a pure macro lens, and this money is not an issue, should have rather pull the 100 macro into consideration solely for the two points. However, it should also be noted that the 60mm focal length figures of a Crop-DSLR good 100mm focal length full-frame (virtually 60 Macro is thus a 100 Macro of Crop cameras). Sharpness and contrast are excellent the 60s even in macro shots. Of course you should not expect miracles without any experience. 1: 1 macro (and larger) are perfect with a lot of experience and / or luck, before it is practice, practice, practice and deal with lighting, aperture, depth of field, distance and tripod. The disadvantage for the photography of inanimate objects unfortunately is actually the smaller working distance of the 60s compared to the 100, the insect drives but faster in flight. With experience and patience but can shoot just as good macros, as with the 100. The sharpness is even slightly better at 60.
Overall, I am impressed by the 60s. For me, it kills two birds with one stone - and with perfect L-image quality (yes, actually as good) and at a price of less than half than the total price of the two lenses, which it replaced for me. Of course you have to do at both ends of the scale, small drawbacks: for a standard lens, the light sensitivity is perhaps some too low (for the bokeh and sharpness perfect), too short for a macro, the working distance for some perhaps. All in one package but the 60er delivers extremely convincing from (especially for the price) and makes absolutely outstanding images if you have once familiarized with its possibilities. For me full 5 stars.
(PS: The matching lens hood ET-67B mitkaufen equal, the front lens sits relatively far forward and will thank you with much better contrast.)
