EnglishBrenda Loc: Kent, England

To answer your questions......

The zoom lenses which say they are macro are not real macro lenses so if you think you will be serious about macro then I would avoid these and get a proper macro lens.

The long macro lenses give you more working distance which is important if you are trying to approach an small frightened critter. You need to be really close to the subject to get a true 1:1 image with say, 60mm macro lenses but 90-105 are the favourite of many members and good work horses.

I have read from other members that third party macro lenses are very good, around 90 to 105mm are good lengths and very useful for all sorts of things in addition to macro images - portraits or flowers etc. The longer macro lenses are more expensive and heavier, I have a 105mm which is sharp, 150mm is a reasonable option - any longer than 150mm need a strong and steady hand in my opinion. At the top of the macro section there are many locked threads giving much information on all things macro, if you are serious about macro this is a good place to start as are youtube videos.

EnglishBrenda Loc: Kent, England

double post

bellgamin Loc: Ewa Beach, Hawaii

For emphasis! 😁

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Pay attention! She's British! Both attributes are important!

More seriously, the comment about focal length and proximity is important. I use APS-C Canon cameras, I have both extension tubes (Canon - not cheap) and close up lenses (also Canon, 250D and 500D, the dual element expensive kind) and I have the Canon EF-S 60mm macro lens. It is an excellent lens, but if I were buying again I would go for a longer focal length, around 100mm. Even though it has an equivalent "focal length" or field of view to a 96mm lens on a full frame Canon camera it does not address the proximity to subject issues.

Also, a good tripod (not inexpensive) and even a ring flash ( also often not inexpensive ) can be useful.

Do try to find the macro forum. There is experience and good advice to be found there.

bellgamin Loc: Ewa Beach, Hawaii

QUICKIE - please take a quick look at the following Nikon zoom macro lens. It is in excellent condion, fits my camera just fine, & is within my humble budget. Yes, it may not be the be-all & end-all, but it sounds pretty okay to start with. I think... maybe... perhaps...? 😈
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-28-105mm-Auto-Focus-AF-Macro-Zoom-Lens-Excellent-Condition-/352273809047?_trksid=p2385738.m4383.l4275.c10

Note... ken rockwell's review is at...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28105af.htm

I am getting superb advice right here in this thread. However, I shall hereafter most definitely spend much time in the macro forum.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

I can't comment on this lens. The supplier seems good, but it seems to be a zoom with a 'macro mode', which may enable close focus, but may not give true macro performance.

Nikonistas? Any comments?

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

. I have been told by a friend, who finally bought a Tamron macro lens, that Kenko extension tubes served him well. They cost him about $150.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Both of those options will give you and extremely shallow depth of field, almost none existent. I always buy my micro lenses mint from ebay at a very good savings. I own the Minolta AF 100, and 50 mm micro lenses for my Sony's. Both cost me less than $225.00 and are sharp, sharp, sharp. My Nikon is the 60mm 2.8 D, you can get this lens for a little more than extension tubes and filters together would cost. Check this out.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-AF-60mm-2-8D-Micro-Macro-Prime-FX-Lens-w-UV-Filter-US-Model/253416785039?epid=99688962&hash=item3b00d1448f:g:blwAAOSwCFpaeiqt:sc:USPSPriority!33472!US!-1
If your into Canon you can find Mint micro off eBay for that camera also, again, it would cost you a little more than extension tubes and lenses that you will get rid of cause they won't get you what you want. Trust me.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

On eBay there are some tubes with electronics for very close to those without.

I have no idea as to their quality.

My KENKOS are at least a decade old and function flawlessly.

rhadams824 Loc: Arkansas

From my understanding of Macro, this lens only give a 1:2 or .5x pic thus the pic is 1/2 the size of a 1:1 pic from a true Macro lens at its closest focal point. Not a true macro lens.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Just to comment on an earlier statement: it is not true that auto focus and/or VR are never used for shooting macro. “Never” is simply not true. Both features are not a requirement—but to state that they are never used is false. There are actually some procedures where is IS required. I always use VR when hand-holding for macro and AF is required when using Helicon Remote and a tethered device.

To comment on cheap tubes: They have been known to become stuck—and require “surgery” to get them apart.

The other options to a macro lens (reversing lenses, stacking lenses, lens diopters, manual extension tubes, auto extension tubes, bellows, etc) are likely to be frustrating— and will limit ones ability to focus to infinity should that butterfly suddenly move out of “macro range”. Microscope objectives with require an adapter between the lens and the camera and are also difficult to use. Zoom lenses sometimes labeled as “macro” will not focus to 1:1. A used macro lens is the preferred option and some can be had for the price of a new set of Kenko extension tubes.

reallycynical

I don't do much in the way of macro, so I haven't bothered to bu a macro lens (which is by far the best way to go). Of the two alternatives that you quote I would go the way of the tubes rather that but more glass in front of the lens.

Sandroots Loc: Glen Allen, VA

I recently bought a set of three extension tubes on eBay(Andoer) with AF for $14.29 delivered. I did have to clean the contacts to get them to work but they seem to work well.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

On the cheap I like the "Macro Filters". Easy to use give reasonably good quality if you stop down a bit and the focus ring reasonably allows focus adjustment. Tubes are more fiddly than the filters and not quite the ease of versatility. A focus rail works with all methods as it does not actually have anything to do with the actual optics except hold them in position.

nauticalmike

One thing I never see mentioned in these macro threads is the adaptor to control the aperture of the lens when used reversed. Personally I think that shooting macro with a reversed lens without one is lacking in realizing the full potential of reversed lens macrophotography. That being said I prefer using the extension tubes. I picked up a cheap set of them on amazon, Kenko I think, for around $30 and they autofocus and work flawlessly even when I stack all of them together.