Starter Macro lens

RyanJS254

RyanJS254

Messages
27
Name
Ryan
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Guys,

Sorry if this is in the wrong section. Just wanted to get your input on good started macro lenses.

I have a Nikon D5300 at the moment and have three lenses at the moment but non are currently Dedicated Macro lens. Is there any that you guys would recommend?
 
I think that the first decision should probably be what focal length you want...

50mm? 90 or 100mm or something longer like 150 or 180mm? If you like photographic things that may get scared and run or fly away a longer lens may be an advantage... Another factor that may influence you is if you want the lens to be dual use, for example you may use a 50mm macro for... macro :D and maybe also for general walk about stuff and you may use a 150mm for macro and portraits if your heart so desires.

So, I'd first decide what I'd use the lens for and that would influence the focal length I'd go for.

Personally I liked my Sigma 150mm f2.8 on my Canon DSLR's but I mow have an old manual Sigma 50mm f2.8 that I use on my Sony A7 and Panasonic G1. That's a point actually... macro is generally manual focus so you could consider a cheap manual lens and use it via an adapter. Just a thought :D
 
Last edited:
My advice to people looking to get into macro is not to buy a dedicated macro lens to begin with.

You can give your existing lenses "macro" capabilities either by adding extension tubes or by reversing them (there are adaptors you can buy, usually for less than £10 off eBay).

Once you've tried a bit with that, and learnt more about macro in the process, you'll develop a better idea of which macro lens you want (or indeed if you actually need one). There's not really any such thing a "starter" macro lens. You'll likely want a quality lens if you do decide to get one so then it largely depends on the types of macro images you want to shoot.
 
I've just gone through the same loop.
I was going to buy the Tamron 90VC (for sale on here if you beat me to it).
I still looking but I bought some tubes which are much cheaper. I couldn't find the recommended variable tube.
 
TimmyG said:
My advice to people looking to get into macro is not to buy a dedicated macro lens to begin with.
Click to expand...

It's a view and it is a cheaper way in but one that I myself didn't go down as it has one or two little advantages and limitations. The advantage is that it's cheap and the limitations include that with tubes you lose the ability to focus at a distance and this could lead to missed shots if you're out and about rather than in a controlled shooting environment and also using tubes means that you have to remove the lens and fit the tubes and refit the lens this again could mean missing shots if you're out and about.

I suppose it hangs on what you want to shoot and how and where you do it. If you're in a controlled situation and shooting a static object at a known distance then tubes could well be a cost effective option. Ideally with the time to use a tripod and / or lighting and possibly at smaller apertures. If however you're out in the world shooting whatever catches your eye before it runs or flies off then a macro lens may well be a better way forward.

When using my macro lenses to be honest I'm not really interested in 1:1 capture. What interests me is taking close up or rather large in the frame hand held shots of the sort of things I come across on a walk or day out such as flowers, leaves bugs and anything else and those things in the wild are IMVHO better suited to the use of a quality lens with a wide aperture than to extension tubes. And of course a macro lens can be used for other than close up shooting. A subject on a table in your studio or even out and about with the luxury of time and close access it's a different situation and tubes could well be just fine :D

Choices... choices...
 
Thanks for the opinions guys, I think I will take a look at a few tubes/ reverse adapters if they are cheaper that way I can see if I like it :)

If I do then I shall see if I can pickup a 100mm macro lens. Are there any that you guys would suggest at this focal length?
 
To be honest any of the macro lenses currently made are excellent
I doubt if you could tell the difference between them in image quality in real world shots( not just test charts)
If I was starting again though I would get the Sigma 105 macro apparently the newest version is excellent, my old and battered sigma 105 still produces very sharp images
100mm is a good focal length for insects, you can get a reasonable working distance and still easily hand hold the lens
longer lenses are more difficult to use, that's what I found anyway:)
 
Try something like a raynox 250 adapter, as a starter.
 
RyanJS254 said:
Thanks for the replies! Just to double check this is the adaptor you were talking about right?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B000A1SZ2Y?pc_redir=1414006541&robot_redir=1

If so may get it as it's not to much at the moment ;)
Click to expand...

That's it, but you might also want to consider the Raynox 150. I think it is a good starter, being intermediate in power/magnification between the Raynox 250, which some people find a bit difficult to use, and the Canon 500D, which I find is good for flowers but not so good for a lot of invertebrates. The less powerful the achromat (as these things are called, because they are made of two or more pieces of glass so as to combat chromatic aberration), the easier they are to use. You can use them on prime lenses, but they work really well on a tele-zoom lens if you have one (I use them on a 55-250 on my 70D).

How much magnification you need depends on what sort of subject you want to photograph, and how "close-in" you want to get. It might be worth spending less than a tenner on something like this (of the appropriate size for your filter thread). These close up filters are made of single pieces of glass. They are not achromatic, and the image quality will be rather poor, so you'll need to think of them as throw-away items. However, you will be able to find out two important things using them - how much magnification you want, and whether you can get on with close-up lenses that fit on you camera lens. The +2 lens is the same power as the Canon 500D close up lens. the +4 is almost as powerful as the Raynox 150, and the +10 is a bit more powerful than the Raynox 250.
 
If you did decide to get a macro lens in the future, I have found the Tamron 90mm 1:1 ratio to be a good performer and something that I have been able to learn with
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top