Macro Lens for Xmas - Help

F

full auto

Suspended / Banned
Messages
272
Edit My Images
Yes
So Christmas is round the corner, and I want santa to bring me a macro lens.

In your opinions, what lens gives the most bang for the buck. I think Santa's budget will be between £250 and £500 depending on how good my argument is for forking out more cash.

I have a 400D.

:help:
 
Well, for the best macro photos I've ever seen, ajophotog uses a Panasonic FZ8 digital camera and the Raynox MSN-202 'macro lens adaptor'

You can pick up the Panasonic FZ8 for around £180 and the Raynox adaptor can be found on a few websites for around £40.
The good thing about the Panasonic FZ8 is it has an unbelievable focus distance. Something like a few centimetres.

But! If a camera isn't what you're looking for and you want a lens, then I'm not too sure really. You'll have to have a look on the macro forum threads and see what lenses they're using.
 
Do a search for Tamron 90 & Sigma 100 macro lenses.... they are better value than the much more expensive Canon.. and there is much chatter about them on these forums!
 
Agreed, the Sigma 105mm [in your price range] is touted as definately being the canine dangly bits of macro lenses. Or, if you can subsidise Santas wallet a little, the Sigma 150mm Macro also gets great feedback with more flexibility on distance from subject.
 
The;

Tamron 90mm
Canon 100mm
Sigma 105mm
Sigma 150mm
Sigma 180mm

should all be on your research list. Ive personally got a Sigma 150mm, and I couldn't fault it. Probably my favourite lens in my bag. :)
 
I've been looking into Macro lenses recently.

I tired a couple out the other day and the Sigma 105mm was pretty decent. I also looked at the Canon 100mm too and whilst it costs a bit more money, I couldnt figure out the difference between the two. The AF was slightly better/quicker on the canon, but at such close proximity I found it desirable to use MF anyway.
 
I think whatever you go for with the macro lenses you will be happy, I went for the canon 100mm, but from shots I have seen from the others there is nothing much in it.
With your budget I would consider the 150 and 180 sigma.
 
Well, I'm amazed that nobody has suggested the EF-S60 as the perfect starter macro for a crop body. I would have thought that the 150's and 180's are a bit on the long side for a beginner and would advise something between 60mm and 105mm. The EF100 and Sigma 105 are both class acts but I think the EF-S60 is the one to cut your teeth on....also has the added advantage of taking pretty good portraits and a very smooth and quiet USM AF......all IMHO of course

Bob
 
The Sigma 150mm macro is stunning - one of the best they do - I have it in Nikon flavour - but you can get it in Canon fitting too.
 
Sigma 105 EX DG Macro,:thumbs: for me. Got it a couple of weeks ago. Stunning lens and £100 cheaper than the 150mm. Money saved towards a ring flash perhaps? Infact, for £500 you'll get the 105 and the Sigma EM 140 flash. Job done!!!!

Took this last week, don't have the ring flash myself yet, so this was with the onboard flash.

Spiders-3.jpg
 
thank you all for the advice. Santa has a lot to chew on.

Im amazed what good results ajophotog has with such a budget setup. But Im really looking for a lens only.

I cant buy a lens to learn on, then upgrade, I just cant afford it. So the one I buy now has to be the one I will be happy with after I have learnt the basics. I am a jump in at the deep end kinda guy anyway.

1 more question....

So whats the deal with the ring flash? How important is it to plan one into my budget?

ok, thats 2 questions ;)
 
full auto said:
thank you all for the advice. Santa has a lot to chew on.

Im amazed what good results ajophotog has with such a budget setup. But Im really looking for a lens only.

I cant buy a lens to learn on, then upgrade, I just cant afford it. So the one I buy now has to be the one I will be happy with after I have learnt the basics. I am a jump in at the deep end kinda guy anyway.

1 more question....

So whats the deal with the ring flash? How important is it to plan one into my budget?

ok, thats 2 questions ;)
Click to expand...

A ringflash certainly will make life easier, but its by no means essential. If you follow the links in my sig, you can see some of my macro work, all of which was done with natural light. The reason ringflashes are usefull is because with 1:1 macro work, the depth of field is ultra thing. To overcome this you need to stop the lens down to say f8, but this obviously means less light and slower shutter speeds. so to keep the dof good, and decent shutter speeds you need additional light; ie a ringflash. I wouldn't mind one eventually, but for now im coping quite fine. :)
 
Messiah Khan said:
If you follow the links in my sig, you can see some of my macro work, all of which was done with natural light.
Click to expand...

Dont want to massage your ego too much, but I look at your DA page and home page quite a lot. Probably half the reason Im looking at the Sigma 150mm macro. Your work is quite frankly stunning.

Interesting about the ring flash. Basically, something to put on my birthday present list :D
 
You should be able to cope ok with a normal external flash if you have one or as MK said natural light with a standard macro lens, I used that setup for ages and only decided to get a ringflash when I got the MPE but only because the working distance on the MPE is stupidly close.
Having said that the lighting from the ringflash is superb for macro.
 
I have the sigma 105mm and can highly recommend it. Check out the reviews at http://photozone.de/ . If you are looking at something around 100mm then the tamron 90mm and tokina 100mm macros seem pretty close to the sigma in terms of quality. Actually these lenses do seem to be one area where the canon or nikon equivalents are not significantly better in terms of image quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top