Canon's 35mm RF f/1.8 STM lens is called a "macro" lens. Its minimum focusing distance is 17 centimeters.
Canon's 24mm EF-S f/2.8 STM lens has a minimum focusing distance of 16 centimeters, less than that of the 35mm RF lens. However, I don't see it usually called a "macro" lens. The 24mm is 38.4mm equivalent, practically the same as 35mm. There is a text "macro 0.16m/0.52ft" written on the 24mm lens, but then again the 40mm EF f/2.8 STM also has "macro 0.3m / 0.98 ft", and it's not called a "macro" lens despite this text.
Why is the 35mm lens a macro lens whereas the 24mm lens isn't?
Is this illogicality:
- 17 cm EF -> macro
- 16 cm EF-S -> not macro
related to sensor size, so that different minimum focusing distances are considered macro depending on the sensor size?
Or is there some property other than the minimum focus distance in the lenses, which I'm not seeing? Such as sharpness at minimum focusing distance?