Macro Lens - Question Again

PD_BARBS

PD_BARBS

Suspended / Banned
Messages
986
Name
Peter Barber
Edit My Images
Yes
First of all I apologise for asking this question again as it always seems to come up, but I am new to DSLR and would really like to try some macro stuff.

I currently only have the kit lens for my 400D. Anyway my options are:

Save really hard for a canon 100mm, or get a Tamron 90mm or Sigma 105mm FOR £100 less. So my first question is the canon truely worth £100 more than the third party lenses.

My other option is to buy a set of extension tubes to use with the kit lens (or even invest further in a nifty fifty).

Don't mind spending around £200, but just want to get the best value for my money.

As a newbie, I want to avoid stupid purchases.

I also like landscape stuff, so something that could give a bit of extra clout in this area would also help swing it.
 
I would say for £200 your best bet is a second hand macro lens. Go for something like the sigma 105mm macro. I have one and it is great.
 


Thanks I know I can pick these up new for not much more than £200, do you know how they compare to the Canon 100mm
 
For around £200 go for the Sigma 105, here's a couple of examles of what it can do.

Ladybug-1.jpg


2Macro-1.jpg


Hope this helps:thumbs:
 
I have a 50mm 1.8 and use extension tubes on it, and get good results! However I rarely do macro stuff so I've never used a real macro lens to compare
 
A sigma 105mm mcaro is around £250 new. So i would either go for one of them if you can strech.

I have had no experience with the canon but from what i have hear i doubt there will be much difference many people use the sigma and tamron alternatives.
 
Hello PurpleClouds

Could you post some samples for me.


Although the sigma ones are awesome
 
If you pay around £200 for a secondhand good condition reasonbably new sigma 105mm macro you could probably sell it within a couple of months and get your money back if you decide it isn't for you.
 
There is very little if any difference in IQ between Canon, Sigma or Tamron, you'll be happy with the results from either.
Personaly I would go for a set of auto extension tubes first, you will get good results with them, and if you decide you enjoy macro they still come in handy if you buy a macro lens.
 
visualisetheworld said:
If you pay around £200 for a secondhand good condition reasonbably new sigma 105mm macro you could probably sell it within a couple of months and get your money back if you decide it isn't for you.
Click to expand...

Its weird.

I have been following eBay for the last few weeks, trying to pick up a bargain and the prices are silly, it seems that lenses do not depreciate that much.

What about some of Hong Kong sellers any reason to avoid them ?
 
What the sigma 105mm macro goes for more than £200??
 
I guess the problem with HK, is import and postage charges. if you can get it that way go for it.

I was thinking of selling mine soon as i do not use it, but probably not for a couple of months.
 
visualisetheworld said:
I guess the problem with HK, is import and postage charges. if you can get it that way go for it.

I was thinking of selling mine soon as i do not use it, but probably not for a couple of months.
Click to expand...

If you have a change of mind let me know
 
I have the Canon 100mm macro and absolutely adore it. Very sharp, easy to use, fairly quiet AF and not heavy either. I've just posted a few photos taken using it in the Macro section of this site - topic called "A mixed bunch of bugs" if you want example images. It could no doubt produce much better results in more experienced hands though.

I can't give an opinion on any competitors, as I haven't used them, all I can say is I'm extremely pleased with mine.
 
Hi Barbs, I had the same macro dilema myself over the last week, Canon 100mm, signa 105mm or tamron 90mm. Is the canon really worth the extra money? as all review I've read can't seem to split them,

However having recently purchased a lens from kerso (which I would recomend, and so would most on here who have used him I think) I thought I'd see what price he was asking for the canon. and to my suprise it actually works out cheaper when you take into account that canon has £40 cash back on this lens at the moment. So I ordered it from him and am now awaiting for it to arrive,

PM him
 
Noodles said:
Hi Barbs, I had the same macro dilema myself over the last week, Canon 100mm, signa 105mm or tamron 90mm. Is the canon really worth the extra money? as all review I've read can't seem to split them,

However having recently purchased a lens from kerso (which I would recomend, and so would most on here who have used him I think) I thought I'd see what price he was asking for the canon. and to my suprise it actually works out cheaper when you take into account that canon has £40 cash back on this lens at the moment. So I ordered it from him and am now awaiting for it to arrive,

PM him
Click to expand...



Thanks,

I hope I am now being cheeky, but what did you pay for it.


Also does anyone know if the Cosina 100mm, is worth it as a cheap alternative, I know from the reviews that optically good, build quality poor.

Any thoughts ?
 
LauraF said:
I have the Canon 100mm macro and absolutely adore it. Very sharp, easy to use, fairly quiet AF and not heavy either. I've just posted a few photos taken using it in the Macro section of this site - topic called "A mixed bunch of bugs" if you want example images. It could no doubt produce much better results in more experienced hands though.

I can't give an opinion on any competitors, as I haven't used them, all I can say is I'm extremely pleased with mine.
Click to expand...

Laura,

Great pictures, this however raises another questions, do I ned a flash gun, will I struggle without one ?

I can see this getting very expensive.
 
I have a tamron 90 that i bought from http://www.onestop-digital.com/catalog/ for £199
Im very happy indeed with it, its my sharpest lens and great for macros. I dont use a macro flash. I try to either go with natural light or if needed i use the pop-up flash
 
No, a flashgun isn't necessary - I'm just unlucky as all the bugs in my garden hide in the shadows! ;) I think a lot of insect 'togs do use macro ring flashes, but it's not a necessity and you can certainly get some great results without them (plus, if needs must, I'm sure the pop-up flash on your camera will suffice :) ).

Another recommendation for kerso here, I got my flashgun from him for around half the price it cost elsewhere - so he's definitely worth contacting if you decide to go down the canon route :)
 
I'm currently selling a 'like new' canon 100mm macro lens in the for sale section :)
 
wez130 said:
I'm currently selling a 'like new' canon 100mm macro lens in the for sale section :)
Click to expand...

Hello Wez

I just saw it, unfortunately abit above my budget at the moment, but certainly gave me food for thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top