What macro lens ?

[Gairo]

Hi all, I'd like to expand my range a little and try some macro photography, I like the idea of a nice 1:1 105mm macro lens but obviously cost is a big factor and they ain't cheap, what alternative should i look at as I'd like to effectively try it out before I commit to spending a large amount of money on a macro lens. Are these so called 'macro extension tubes' on ebay any good or should I avoid them and try something else ? I just need some pointers on what to look for and what to avoid, I have no particular subject in mind but macro photography has piqued my curiosity hence the question.

Thanks in advance

PS: I have a Nikon D5000 with 18-55mm kit lens, Tamron 70 - 300mm and a Kenko 2x teleconverter...

 

[mrjames]

tamron 90mm macro

great lens and with your 2x teleconverter you'll get 2:1 mag out of it

another option would be to reverse the 18-55 lens with a cheap lens reversing adaptor- you can then use a macro extension tube to get even higher magnification- you'll get something like 8:1 with the lens reversed at 18mm on a full set of extension tubes- but the working distance will be around 1/2" at best


you'll also be able to use the lens in lower light, and for portraits as it is a f2.8 lens, which will be much faster than your other f5.6 lenses

another option could be a 50mm macro,

 

[Gairo]

tamron 90mm macro

great lens and with your 2x teleconverter you'll get 2:1 mag out of it

another option would be to reverse the 18-55 lens with a cheap lens reversing adaptor- you can then use a macro extension tube to get even higher magnification- you'll get something like 8:1 with the lens reversed at 18mm on a full set of extension tubes- but the working distance will be around 1/2" at best


you'll also be able to use the lens in lower light, and for portraits as it is a f2.8 lens, which will be much faster than your other f5.6 lenses

another option could be a 50mm macro,

Ooh I didn't know I could reverse the lens, thanks for that, I might give that a try Where's best to look for the Tamron 90mm ?

 

[andyred]

My daughter is into still life / plants Macro photography and has the Sigma 50mm Macro lens (which is a true 1:1 lens) and it's very good.

Obviously for bugs etc, 50mm is on the short side

 

[Gairo]

That Sigma 50mm looks ok too, just got back from holiday in Mallorca so thanks for the replies, I'm just catching up a bit now

 

[chivers67]

There's a good Sigma 50f2.8 in the Nikon classifieds I used to own.

Good thing about the 50 is you can hand hold it pretty easily without shake that people often get with slower shutter speeds with longer focal lengths.

 

[Gairo]

There's a good Sigma 50f2.8 in the Nikon classifieds I used to own.

Good thing about the 50 is you can hand hold it pretty easily without shake that people often get with slower shutter speeds with longer focal lengths.

Thanks for that buddy, Unfortunately I can't access the classifieds as yet (I'm too new ) so could you email or PM me the details and any pics on the ad please ?

 

[chivers67]

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=356717

 

[Gairo]

Thanks for the pics Pete but i still can't follow that link as I dont have sufficient access yet

 

[gad-westy]

My route was:

Raynox 150 on my Tamron 70-300

Sigma 50mm 2.8

Sigma 180mm 3.5

The Raynox was a great intro to macro but it really is tricky to use and a little bit of a faff in terms of set up. It did give some great images though and was very satisfying and cheap route into macro.

The Sigma 50mm was a superb lens and a bargain (I paid £80 for mine). I eventually sold it as I fancied a bit more length. In hindsight I wish I'd kept it.

The Sigma 180mm is exceptional for macro stuff but is a big old lump. You can't use it casually.

In your current position, I'd highly recommend giving a Raynox a whirl and see if you catch the bug.

 

[Gairo]

My route was:

Raynox 150 on my Tamron 70-300

Sigma 50mm 2.8

Sigma 180mm 3.5

The Raynox was a great intro to macro but it really is tricky to use and a little bit of a faff in terms of set up. It did give some great images though and was very satisfying and cheap route into macro.

The Sigma 50mm was a superb lens and a bargain (I paid £80 for mine). I eventually sold it as I fancied a bit more length. In hindsight I wish I'd kept it.

The Sigma 180mm is exceptional for macro stuff but is a big old lump. You can't use it casually.

In your current position, I'd highly recommend giving a Raynox a whirl and see if you catch the bug.

Many thanks for the info