Macro Lens (Page 3): amfoto1, Don't know very much about all that tect stuff. Just what works for me, ok?If you'll PM me, I'll send you the info on what I bought on e-bay the other...

hswader Loc: Bedford, PA

amfoto1,
Don't know very much about all that tect stuff. Just what works for me, ok?If you'll PM me, I'll send you the info on what I bought on e-bay the other day. I'll include a photo of the very tube set that i got.
Hey, it works for me. The photo I've included was taken using the macro tube ring extension, ok? {hswader@yahoo.com}

The photo has been PP and cropped.

Red Crystals w/ actual dimensions noted

gemlenz Loc: Gilbert Arizona

You got robbed if you paid that for the lens. You can get them for less that $300 now, with VC.

RWCRNC wrote:

How much is an arm and a leg? I have a 90mm Tamron with image stabilization that cost $795. The non IS is half that. I love my macro lens. I started with extension tubes though.

gemlenz Loc: Gilbert Arizona

Canon has a 60mm EF-S Macro that is good. Non-IS. You can get one on Ebay for around $300.

egbarr26 wrote:

I have a Cannon EOS Digital Rebel XS/1000D and have been looking for a macro lens that will not cost an arm and a leg. I have heard about a series of "filters" that are alleged to serve as a macro lens, but I'm cautious about that. Any wisdom to shed on my "problem" will be welcome.

hswader Loc: Bedford, PA

amfoto1,
Here are the photos of the tube extensions I used, ok?
One is 9 mm; one 16 mm; one 30 mm

This end to camera body

lens attach here

4 parts

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

egbarr26 wrote:

I have a Cannon EOS Digital Rebel XS/1000D and have been looking for a macro lens that will not cost an arm and a leg. I have heard about a series of "filters" that are alleged to serve as a macro lens, but I'm cautious about that. Any wisdom to shed on my "problem" will be welcome.

Go to KEH I believe they have some original EOS 100mm macro lenses. They are tack sharp but have the older arc drive motor. This should be no issue for macro. And yes they will fit on and work with any EOS camera ever made with full and complete functionality.

egbarr26 Loc: N. Manchester, IN

Thanks to everyone who had something to say about macro lenses. I think I have the sense of what all of you said and I thank you! I don't need any more info on macro lenses.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

egbarr26 wrote:

Thanks to everyone who had something to say about macro lenses. I think I have the sense of what all of you said and I thank you! I don't need any more info on macro lenses.

You might just try buying a reversing ring for an old 28mm lens and mount it backwards to your camera.... That's how I got this shot. Total cost of lens and adapter was $35

Second image just shows you how the concept works.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Blurryeyed wrote:

You might just try buying a reversing ring for an old 28mm lens and mount it backwards to your camera.... That's how I got this shot. Total cost of lens and adapter was $35

Second image just shows you how the concept works.

Agree with Geoff. And if you think you cannot produce high quality macros using reverse lenses on tubes, check out Thomas Shahan's flicker photos. If you don't know Shahan, here's an introduction. He uses both a 28mm & a 50 mm on extension tubes.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/49580580@N02/

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

davidrb wrote:

Canon markets something they call "close up&q... (show quote)

Yes, they are in fact very nice and deliver good picture quality, what they don't deliver is macro, all they do is give you good close-ups. For example, if you have to be shooting with the 400/5.6 and you hate that minimum focusing distance, just put on one of these and hooray, you can get as close as two feet. That's what they are mainly for, if you want to get into macro, get extension tubes, a macro lens, or a bellows!

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

I use the Tokina 100mm f2.8 and find it very sharp. Priced less than Canon. One feature I really like is the collar that you push or pull to switch between manual focus and auto focus. You can auto focus the lens and with just a pull back tweak the focus to optimum sharpness.

randomeyes Loc: wilds of b.c. canada

TheDman wrote:

For $469 I wouldn't hesitate a second to get the excellent Canon 60mm EF-S Macro.

Yup, I 've had one for a few years now. It is one of the sharpest lenses I have come across, can double as a portrait lens also.

egbarr26 Loc: N. Manchester, IN

Thank you, I appreciate the advice!

Ernie

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

The one thing I would strongly suggest is, to not go shorter than 90mm for better MWD.

90-105mm range.....at least :wink:

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Flyextreme wrote:

The one thing I would strongly suggest is, to not go shorter than 90mm for better MWD.

90-105mm range.....at least :wink:

Agreed, another plus about the longer lens is the longer the lens the higher quality of the background blur, be careful to avoid 180 and 200mm range, my experience has been that they are difficult in the field, I have owned 60mm, 100mm, 150mm, and a 180mm. Loved the 180 but the keeper rate was much lower than with the 100.

thephotoman Loc: Rochester, NY

Blurryeyed wrote:

Agreed, another plus about the longer lens is the longer the lens the higher quality of the background blur, be careful to avoid 180 and 200mm range, my experience has been that they are difficult in the field, I have owned 60mm, 100mm, 150mm, and a 180mm. Loved the 180 but the keeper rate was much lower than with the 100.

That makes me feel better. I have a 180mm macro and my keeper rate seemed low compared to my other lenses. I am glad I am not alone.