Would like some help choosing a Macro lens

birdy961

birdy961

Messages
4,071
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Good afternoon all

I have a budget of around £250 - £300 to treat myself to a Macro lens.
Canon fit for a 400D.

The problem is I am totally confused so am looking for some advise from you Macro peeps to point me in the right direction :woot:
 
Consider what you want it for. If you want to shoot bugs then you need to consider a 150mm because you don't need to get so close.
If you want to do large subjects then maybe a 50mm would be better.
A good compromise would be a 100 or 105mm lens.

I have the sigma 105mm EX, my father has a Canon 100mm. When fitted to a 5D you can see that the Canon lens is a little sharper at the edges than the sigma, on a 20D there is no discernible difference. (The smaller sensor means the outer section from each lens isn't used).
Saturation and focus speed/accuracy are the same on both.
The Sigma is cheaper.

There is also the 60mm EF-S, that has excellent reviews but if you ever want to go full frame it will be useless to you.
 
Cheers both

Would be using it mainly on larger subjects I think, Flowers etc
Not really into bugs as yet :D

No plans to go full frame either. the siggy looks quite good so will see if i can get hold of one to play with in a shop :thumbs:
 
I have the Canon EF-S 60mm Macro Lens and it is a fantastic lens, and not too expensive and does fall into your price range.
 
tamron 90mm macro lens and a raynox msn-202 is my suggestion :)

The tammy is great on it's own and coupled with the raynox lens - wow!
 
if your not taking shots of anything moving, the sigma 50mm macro, is a great lens. i use it for all my flower shots, and get brilliantly sharp results. plus its only 160 pounds, which means there will be money to spare, if you wanted extension rings, to get macro past 1:1, or just any other acsesory you may need,
nathan
 
Find yourself a used Canon 100mm Macro, the extra distance you can put in between you and your subject will be handy. The earlier ones lack the USM motor so isn't as fast but autofocusing when doing macro is rarely a good idea anyway. An excellent lens and fully compatiable with full frame should the need arise though cropped sensor is probably better for Macro work anyway. The EF-S 60mm macro is also good but i'd take the 100mm over it any day.
 
sigma 105 mm macro you can pick them up for £270 for we..it will be a great lens..
 
I have only recently bought my macro lens, and went for the Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM. There a couple of reasons why I got this over the 60mm and Sigma/Tamron macros.

The longer working distance, so you don't need to get as close to get 1:1 magnification and it's not an EF-S lens. Now I have no problem with using EF-S, but as I'm only ever going to buy 1 macro lens and I want it to work on any Canon body I'll ever have.

I did not want a Tamron or Sigma because they extend when focusing and at very short working distance I don't want to hit the front of the lens just because I'm focusing
There is a VERY good review of the 100mm here


I got mine from Kerso for £295 and now just waiting for my £40 Canon cashback to arrive so only £255 all in.
 
I have the Canon 100mm Macro, and think it is an excellent lens. With the price from Kerso and £40 cashback I think you would struggle to get better for the money.
 
Took the body into my local store to have a play about and went for the Sigma 70mm 2.8 EX DG in the end
Seems to be a very nice lens, just need to start practising now:bang:


Thanks for all the help and advice everyone:thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top