Dirt cheap Canon Macro lens

Skyline

Skyline

Emmet Brickowski
Messages
4,567
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
My friend has a Canon 550D and wants a macro lens.

What cheap lenses would you recommend? Is the canon 35-70mm any good for her?
 
Daverkl said:
My friend has a Canon 550D and wants a macro lens.

What cheap lenses would you recommend? Is the canon 35-70mm any good for her?
Click to expand...

That isn't a macro lens.

If she wants macro on the cheap she should consider a close up filter, or something like a Raynox 250.
 
50mm 1.8 and extension tubes.

But without knowing the intended purpose ("macro" is a very vague term that covers a lit of different gear requirements) it's just guessing based on cheapness.
 
Also consider the 'plastic fantastic' Cosina macro 100mm f3.5 lens - one here for £99 but I have seen them go for as little as half that on fleabay:
http://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Cosina-100MM-F3.5-MACRO-CANON-FIT_77119.html

Also make sure it comes with the adapter for 1:1 (looks like the one in the link above does not) otherwise it's 2:1. Sounds like a coffee grinder when auto focusing :D but image quality is surprisingly good.
http://www.dyxum.com/columns/articles/lenses/cosina_100_35_macro/cosina_100_35_macro_review.asp
http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/cosina-100mm-f1-3-5-mc-makro.html

Raynox 150 or 250 are also good budget options.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/raynoxdcr250/discuss/72157622763003554/

http://www.flickr.com/groups/raynoxdcr250/pool/
 
That zoom isn't a macro lens. Manufacturers sometimes put macro on lenses because they think it focuses closer than other lenses of the same type but that doesn't make them real macro :D It's a little white lie :D

The cheapest option is probably extention tubes but another option would be an old legacy macro lens and a cheap legacy to eos adapter. As macro is mostly manual focus the lack of AF shouldn't be too much of a problem.

So, tubes would be cheapest but a legacy true macro lens and cheap adapter could probably be had for significantly under £100.
 
Alastair said:
But without knowing the intended purpose ("macro" is a very vague term that covers a lit of different gear requirements) it's just guessing based on cheapness.
Click to expand...

Very true, if it's close ups then extension tubes, if it's eyes on a fly Google reversing ring, about £2 from China but some people can do amazing stuff with them
 
The cheapest ways of getting into macro are probably extension tubes, a close up supplementary lens (these look like clear filters), a reversing ring and a Raynox attachment.

OEM Canon macro lenses are a bit spendy, if your friend is looking for a budget solution, but she might be able to find a used one. I haven't a clue about third party lenses.

What does she want to shoot? For insects, particularly the ones that can sting, the 100mm lenses give you a bit more distance than the 50 - 60mm ones, and you're less likley to spook the subject.
 
I had a Raynox 250 and it got me started on macro so I then bought a Sigma 105 f2.8 on here.
Can't remember what I paid but it certainly wasn't bank-breaking, around the £150 mark I think.
It's a cracking lens, super sharp, though the one thing that puts people off them is the lens extends considerably when focusing, whereas the canon equivalent focuses internally.
Personally I don't find it a problem.
 
oops. forgot about this thread. Thank you everyone for the help. She went with a Raynox 250 and is loving it :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top