Macro lens - which one?

phinix

phinix

Messages
695
Edit My Images
No
I have a Sony A300 and looking for a macro lens, sahrp and ideally 1:1. Nothing expensive, that will be my second lens and first macro ones.
I'm falling in love with Sigma 50mm 2.8 macro - what do you guys think about it? Anyone has it and could show me some examples?

I would use it also for portraits, that sigma sounds good for both I guess...
Should I better save some more money and go for Tamron 90mm or Sigma 70mm?

Sigma 50 is for £238 right now... I would rather buy it chepaer if I could fins one...
 
I rate the Tamron 90mm, great as a portrait lens too (though I don't use it as one). I think many would suggest the Tamron or Sigma 105mm for macro-based work.
 
Only the first two flies on my photo stream are with tubes then back as far as "first Bee" are sp 90mm only. Ian
 
hi, i`ve got the siggy 50mm 2.8 macro lens and i cant fault it, especially with some cheap tubes the sharpness and clarity are bob on!

heres an example for you



hope that helps(y)
 
ozzy38 said:
hi, i`ve got the siggy 50mm 2.8 macro lens and i cant fault it, especially with some cheap tubes the sharpness and clarity are bob on!

heres an example for you

...

hope that helps(y)
Click to expand...

Holy smokes! :nuts:
I would run away seeing that spider on my camera lcd...:D

Do you haev any other photos made with that Sigma 50mm macro lens?
Portraits or something else? Just want to see what it can do. I like Tamron 90mm but it is £100 more than that Sigma, and this Sigma is EX, so it comes with 3 years warranty, thats another plus...
 
phinix said:
Holy smokes! :nuts:
I would run away seeing that spider on my camera lcd...:D

Do you haev any other photos made with that Sigma 50mm macro lens?
Portraits or something else? Just want to see what it can do. I like Tamron 90mm but it is £100 more than that Sigma, and this Sigma is EX, so it comes with 3 years warranty, thats another plus...
Click to expand...

LOL! unfortunately i hav`nt anymore at the moment only just started playing with the lens....im sure someone else will come along with further examples for you.
 
You can go right upto 200mm for portrait but just set your budget and get the best you can to be honest i would go second hand especially members onhere who have good feedback as they will have gone over the lenses with a fine tooth comb to make sure its fine, when all is said and done a lot use just a 50mm i think a good bet would be to go in the middle on size and price if you dont get on with the lens when its a second hand one you loose less or even nothing selling it on
 
james_death said:
You can go right upto 200mm for portrait but just set your budget and get the best you can to be honest i would go second hand especially members onhere who have good feedback as they will have gone over the lenses with a fine tooth comb to make sure its fine, when all is said and done a lot use just a 50mm i think a good bet would be to go in the middle on size and price if you dont get on with the lens when its a second hand one you loose less or even nothing selling it on
Click to expand...

Well said, thanks. Now I need to wait 30 days to get privileges to go to market thread and try to find Sigma 50mm or that Tamron 90mm... but even then I really affraid to buy second hand.. unless its like you said - someone who took good care of it and has good feedback on the forum...
 
hi phinix

if you want to shoot bugs,i'd recommend a focal length of 90mm and over...to prevent scaring them as the working distance might be a little close with a 50mm lens.extension tubes only exacerbate the working distance between subject and lens.i realise the longer focal length macro lens are pretty expensive,but it might be worth saving a while longer to get what you require,rather than buy something you may regret getting sooner or later ;)
 
stan the man said:
hi phinix

if you want to shoot bugs,i'd recommend a focal length of 90mm and over...to prevent scaring them as the working distance might be a little close with a 50mm lens.extension tubes only exacerbate the working distance between subject and lens.i realise the longer focal length macro lens are pretty expensive,but it might be worth saving a while longer to get what you require,rather than buy something you may regret getting sooner or later ;)
Click to expand...

Hi Stan,

thanks, see, thats the point - you're right and I forgot to mention what I want to shoot. I hate bugs:) What I'm looking for is flowers macro, so other "dead" subjects:) Also PC parts and stuff. Other thing I wanted to "suck" form this new lens is portraits. I have a little daughter and portraits from kit lens are not that beautiful as I want. Of course I'm not pro, just learning how to use dSLR. I bought my A300 year ago and after that year I feel like I need something else than just kit lens... I want to explore more and that is why looking for new, but not expensive lens.
I can see another problem here - not many people use Sony equipment, so I may not find any second hand lens that quickly that I may need.:(

I could go for Sigma 17-70 and sell kit lens. That Sigma has macro option, 1:2.3 so that would be enough I think for flowers and pc parts. Portraits would be good as well I believe. However the long end has 4.5, so constant 2.8 would be better, cause I do a lot photos indoors as well... Then Sigma or Tamron comes on top - 18-50 or 17-50. Tamron however doesnt have macro option. Then there is another thing - I want really sharp lens, and to get that I believe I need to get prime lens....
So I decided (not for 100% yet:)) to buy a prime 50 or 90mm for macros and portraits with constant 2.8 and have fun with it, later, next year or so try to sell kit lens and then get sth better, like Tamron 17-50. I don't think that I need a longer lens, but I believe 105 would be fine. But that is a longer story:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top