Best Cheap Canon Fit Macro Lens
- Thread starter IanD
- Start date
- Messages
- 209
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I always liked my Samyang 100mm and the Sigma 100mm is also highly rated.
View: https://youtu.be/KfmCdWvEo2o
- Messages
- 267
- Name
- Joe
- Edit My Images
- No
Reversing ring for existing lenses. About £10.
Seen Canon 100mm 2.8L is for £400 several times these last few months.
Seen Canon 100mm 2.8L is for £400 several times these last few months.
- Messages
- 526
- Edit My Images
- No
As above, reversing rings and extension tubes are a good way to start.... Sigma 105 f2.8 macro can be found for just over £200... Great lens
- Messages
- 5,264
- Name
- Lee
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I had the Canon 100/2.8 macro many years ago. Wasn't nothing wrong with the lens, just my ability & patience to do macro...... 
Not sure what the pricing is now but I only paid something like £270 back in...... 2012ish
Not sure what the pricing is now but I only paid something like £270 back in...... 2012ish
- Messages
- 267
- Name
- Joe
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah but you can use older manual lenses that are cheap, no electrical connections...
Here's an explanation:
OP
- Messages
- 1,566
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks Joe. I actually watched that video last night. Pretty good results.
Not sure if you know, or anyone else does, but I do have questions.....
1) If you use a cheap lens, being that everything is reversed, and the lens sensors aren't working anyway, is a cheap lens likely to affect the quality of the macro images you get much?
2) Again, being that the lens is reversed, and no sensors are required (if I can find a manual one), am I right in thinking that it does not matter at all which brand I use as all i'll need to worry about is the thread on it's end and getting the right camera attachment?
Not sure if you know, or anyone else does, but I do have questions.....
1) If you use a cheap lens, being that everything is reversed, and the lens sensors aren't working anyway, is a cheap lens likely to affect the quality of the macro images you get much?
2) Again, being that the lens is reversed, and no sensors are required (if I can find a manual one), am I right in thinking that it does not matter at all which brand I use as all i'll need to worry about is the thread on it's end and getting the right camera attachment?
- Messages
- 5,919
- Name
- Dominic
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I bought a used sigma 150mm 2.8 macro from mpb, I think it was about £270. It doesn't have os (optical stabilisation), but is still a pretty good lens. Being 150mm, it gives a good working distance from subject, this makes it easier to photograph insects and also helps to get a flash or some kind of light source onto your subject, without the end of the lens getting in the way.
- Messages
- 2,691
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
1) A cheap lens should be OK, the main thing is to make sure your camera is still, use a tripod, I started with a prime lens and extension tubes, and got really pleasing results.
Good lighting is also essential.
2) that is correct.
- Messages
- 797
- Name
- john
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What "Macro" subjects are you looking to photograph? Also how much is a "small amount" of money?
I notice from your signature that you have some very nice lenses (I have the first two) so there is no point in compromising. Currently I use the Canon 100 F2.8 Macro (bought used) and have been very happy for about a decade. I cannot fault it and could find no reason to move to the 100 L - though it is prettier. The 100 F2.8 Macro is now pretty cheap used and will rival or beat your 16-35/24-70 V2 for IQ + you won't spend a lot. I have all three, the "old" Canon 100 F2.8 Macro is still a great lens!
I notice from your signature that you have some very nice lenses (I have the first two) so there is no point in compromising. Currently I use the Canon 100 F2.8 Macro (bought used) and have been very happy for about a decade. I cannot fault it and could find no reason to move to the 100 L - though it is prettier. The 100 F2.8 Macro is now pretty cheap used and will rival or beat your 16-35/24-70 V2 for IQ + you won't spend a lot. I have all three, the "old" Canon 100 F2.8 Macro is still a great lens!
OP
- Messages
- 1,566
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply.
To be honest, i'm not really sure on subject matter. I was at RHS Wisley on Sunday and would love to have been able to get some really nice close up, detailed pics of flowers so there's a starting point, plus anything in general I can take images of close up to pick out better detail. I'd love to move on to things like insects, spiders etc one day but feel that's a step too far for now and also may need much better lenses.
I do understand your comment about trying not to compromise in quality of lenses too much but I guess it's al down to funds available. Sure, I could save up for a Canon 100mm mkII (which would be me eventual wish list lens) but for now it was really just a chance to see what's out there that can perform well on a budget.
And i'm not really sure what the budget is and just trying to follow up suggestions to see if they are financially viable, so all advice welcome
I'll look at the mkI Canon 100mm and see what sort of price it is. Maybe because of the undoubted quality of the images that it can produce, there would still be a good resale value later on if needed
Thanks for the reply.
To be honest, i'm not really sure on subject matter. I was at RHS Wisley on Sunday and would love to have been able to get some really nice close up, detailed pics of flowers so there's a starting point, plus anything in general I can take images of close up to pick out better detail. I'd love to move on to things like insects, spiders etc one day but feel that's a step too far for now and also may need much better lenses.
I do understand your comment about trying not to compromise in quality of lenses too much but I guess it's al down to funds available. Sure, I could save up for a Canon 100mm mkII (which would be me eventual wish list lens) but for now it was really just a chance to see what's out there that can perform well on a budget.
And i'm not really sure what the budget is and just trying to follow up suggestions to see if they are financially viable, so all advice welcome
I'll look at the mkI Canon 100mm and see what sort of price it is. Maybe because of the undoubted quality of the images that it can produce, there would still be a good resale value later on if needed
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,624
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
As most macro/close up is arguably best done with manual focus I wonder if you'd consider a manual focus macro lens? One plus point is that they can be cheaper and one negative point is that when used for non macro pictures you're still only manual focus. I used to love my Sigma 150mm f2.8 on my Canon DSLR's plus I also had a Canon 50mm f2.5 macro but that lens only went to half life size (I think.... not 1:1 anyway) and at the time the Sigma 50mm f2.8 EX was also an option but these days I get by with a manual focus 50mm f2.8 from the film days.
I suppose a lot depends on what length you want. 50mm may be ok for flowers and stuff like that but you may want a longer lens to keep a bit more distance between you and bugs and things that are likely to get frightened and run or fly away.
One thing to think about is your final output size and how you look at pictures. The vast majority of my pictures are viewed on my pc or on other peoples tablets and phones so a 1500 pixel wide picture is perfectly fine for me much of the time and for flower shots this allows me to use an ordinary lens at just a bit more than minimum focus distance and crop to 100% and still end up with a picture I'm happy with. For smaller things like insects and for larger pictures macro lenses are much better though
I suppose a lot depends on what length you want. 50mm may be ok for flowers and stuff like that but you may want a longer lens to keep a bit more distance between you and bugs and things that are likely to get frightened and run or fly away.
One thing to think about is your final output size and how you look at pictures. The vast majority of my pictures are viewed on my pc or on other peoples tablets and phones so a 1500 pixel wide picture is perfectly fine for me much of the time and for flower shots this allows me to use an ordinary lens at just a bit more than minimum focus distance and crop to 100% and still end up with a picture I'm happy with. For smaller things like insects and for larger pictures macro lenses are much better though
- Messages
- 797
- Name
- john
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply.
To be honest, i'm not really sure on subject matter. I was at RHS Wisley on Sunday and would love to have been able to get some really nice close up, detailed pics of flowers so there's a starting point, plus anything in general I can take images of close up to pick out better detail. I'd love to move on to things like insects, spiders etc one day but feel that's a step too far for now and also may need much better lenses.
I do understand your comment about trying not to compromise in quality of lenses too much but I guess it's al down to funds available. Sure, I could save up for a Canon 100mm mkII (which would be me eventual wish list lens) but for now it was really just a chance to see what's out there that can perform well on a budget.
And i'm not really sure what the budget is and just trying to follow up suggestions to see if they are financially viable, so all advice welcome
I'll look at the mkI Canon 100mm and see what sort of price it is. Maybe because of the undoubted quality of the images that it can produce, there would still be a good resale value later on if needed
If you are not certain about going into the realm of Macro photography and you are looking at larger subjects - then have you considered extension tubes?
I sounds like you are looking for "Close Up" rather than Macro. If this is the case then extension tubes would be just the job + they are dirt cheap! I have a couple of sets so that whichever pack I take they are with me.
Have a look here: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Auto-Foc...f3fe:g:PN0AAOSw4vJauhqM&LH_ItemCondition=1000
Mine don't have the pretty (?) red rings but they are the same items. I use mine mainly on my Canon 100-400 Mk2 and Canon 800 F5.6 L IS so that I can get up close. However they work just fine on any Canon EF or EFS lens, and yes they do allow you to use an EFS lens on an EF body.
Even if you do not get into Macro they will be handy and, if you do, they will be very handy!
Just a thought.
- Messages
- 1,140
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Have a look at www.extreme-macro.co.uk any of the options listed there will work with your camera. Johan has plenty of tips on technique too, which is the main failing of my macro efforts.
If it's just for macro use canon fit becomes unnecessary, you can even adapt lenses designed to sit much closer to the sensor & just have some added extension for closer focusing.
If it's just for macro use canon fit becomes unnecessary, you can even adapt lenses designed to sit much closer to the sensor & just have some added extension for closer focusing.