Next Purchase, A Macro Lens.

Jackal79

Jackal79

Messages
88
Name
Carl
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been using and learning about my camera for 9 months now and out of all the shots I've taken with it, I enjoy the close-up ones the best. To this end, I've decided that my next purchase should be a dedicated macro lens. I have a Canon 1100d, I will mainly be shooting flowers and bugs with it to start with and I think I can go up to about the £500 mark. So far I've looked at 3 different lenses :-

Canon 60mm 2.8
Canon 100mm 2.8
Sigma 105mm 2.8

First of all then, what experiences have people had using these lenses?
Secondly, which one is best suited to my camera? (maybe this one's a pointless question but I don't know)
Thirdly, are there any other lenses that I should be considering?
 
All 3 are very capable lenses and will all provide good results. I have the Canon 60mm and have used it with my old 30D and 7D (as well as a 100L for my 5d2).
None of them are more suited to your camera than the others, however bear in mind that the 60mm is EF-S only so won't fit a full frame camera (unless you use an extension ring). This may be a totally moot point though if you have no intentions of ever changing.
I'd also consider the Tamron 90mm, just like the Sigma it has stabilisation which may be useful on occassion.
 
stu.artd said:
I'd also consider the Tamron 90mm, just like the Sigma it has stabilisation which may be useful on occassion.
Click to expand...

Also loads cheaper than Canon.

@ OP I have an Tamron and can vouch for its capabilities. Though it is pretty much in the muchness between canon/tamron/sigma.

Though I would look at other options first such as raynox/lens reversal if you havent already.

Have a look at posts by @GardenersHelper for use of raynox. Also check out the macro section for various setups could save yourself £100's.
 
I have the Tamron 90mm and optically I think it's great value for money - certainly worth consideration.

It's downside is noisy slow AF, but most macro is taken in manual so not an issue.
 
We have the Sigma 50mm Macro lens and are very pleased with the results from it, depending on what you are wanting to shoot can make a difference to the focal length needed.

If you are just shooting flowers / objects etc, then 50mm upwards will suffice, if you are wanting to shoot insects etc, then I would suggest you look at, at least 100mm focal length...
 
Tintin124 said:
Though I would look at other options first such as raynox/lens reversal if you havent already.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I'll look into these. Thanks.

andyred said:
If you are just shooting flowers / objects etc, then 50mm upwards will suffice, if you are wanting to shoot insects etc, then I would suggest you look at, at least 100mm focal length...
Click to expand...

Based on this I think I'll rule out the 60mm then.
 
I've only had personal experience of the Canon 100 (L and non-L) and given the second hand prices the 100mm (non-L) is really good value for money and within your budget, the range is long enough not to scare most bugs unless you cast a shadow over them - it also makes a pretty good portrait lens.
 
I bought the new Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS recently and I have to say that it's as good a performer as you'll get... I honestly can't find anything to fault with it and for £369 new, it's an absolute bargain! I made a point of going to Sigma's stand at the Photography show to tell them just how highly I rated it! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top