janv70

Any suggestions for a macro lens that has worked for you in the range of $400 for shooting insects, critters, nature? Also would like to use it for portraits. Checked the Tamron 180mm lens but there is no VR and read autofocus is slow yet this range is recommended because of the needed distance from camera to subject when photographing small, moving insects. Is VR and autofocus real matters to consider when doing macro because of the recommended use of a tripod? Thanks in advance for your responses.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I do not know non Canon macro lenses but I really like the IS of my 100mm Canon macro for time when hand holding. Also when using it as a regular 100mm lens.
Unfortunately the only Canon macro I know of is over your budget.
But get a lens for macro with IS if at all possible. They are wonderful.

janv70

Thanks, your suggestion for IS makes sense so I may have to save a bit more toward it. I've seen the Tokina priced in that range, too, so Im in the process of gathering as much info before making a decision.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Happy shopping.

ltj123 Loc: NW Wisconsin

Inexpensive lense that can be used as normal also is Canon 50mm F2.5 macro. It's been around a long time, I've had mine for about 12 years, probably only available on used market. It has some draw backs to this lense but it's been very useful for me over the years.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

The Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro is very popular for full frame work. With your APS-C body the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM will give you approximately the same field of view. It is an excellent lens. I had one but sold it a few years back when I went to full frame for my Macro attempts. Extremely sharp, small, light weight, and well built. Currently selling new for $399.99.
For $599.99 there is the Canon EF-S 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM which is also very highly rated. Probably the better choice since it gives you more working room and will work on full frame bodies if you ever go that route.
Neither has stabilization and don't need it if you plan to use a tripod. Auto focus is also not a big deal. While Canon's auto focus is generally excellent, from what I have seen, plus my own experience, most Macro shooters tend to focus manually.

DPERDELWITZ

I have a 2x lens that screws on the filter threads for my T3i. Seems to work OK tho I do not shoot many real close photos YET.

haroldross Loc: Walthill, Nebraska

I have both the Canon 50mm f2.5 and the Canon 100mm f2.8 (L and non L) lens. I would highly recommend the Canon 100mm f2.8 non L for a macro lens on a crop frame Canon- I have used them on a Canon T2i.

The 50mm f2.5 is not a true macro unless you have the life size adapter. This also changes the focal length to about 70mm. Both the 50mm and 60mm macro lens would work ok but you would be right on top of your subject- working distance of a few inches. The 100mm macro would give you a bit more workng distance when photographing insects and such.

A tripod and manual focus works best for macro work. I would save a few extra bucks and go for the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens. You may be able to buy a reburbished 100mm macro directly from Canon for under $500. Canon USA has them currently in stock for $479.99.

ballsafire Loc: Lafayette, Louisiana

If I were you, I'd wait and study "Micro" till you were sure what you wanted; for example: study for the possible use of an extension tube set such as the "Automatic Extension Tube Set DG-C with 3 rings" by Viltrox -- found at eBay online, also; along with some kind of Ring lights. Good hunting!

Joe Blow

Search the used lenses at B&H, Roberts, Samys, Adorama, KEH and other reputable retailers.

A Canon EF-85mm USM f1.8 is available at Adorama and B&H for $350. Cheaper at KEH.

Good luck

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

You don't need a 180mm macro for insects. A 90-105mm range is sufficient. I don't shoot Canon but regardless, things remain the same. I have 8 different true macro lenses from 55 to 180mm. Some are AF, the rest are MF. None have stabilization. None are used for any other shooting other than macro as I have other lenses to fill that niche. That's not to say they haven't been used for other than macro shots, but when mounted, they are intended for macro shooting. Unless you intend to use the lens for other than macro situations, vibration control is of little use the closer you get to life size. Same with autofocus. My go-to macro lens is an older manual focus 105mm F2.8 lens. The problems with longer focal lengths macro lenses iare that they become bigger and heavier as the focal length used increases ( as well as the cost) and the depth of field (already small) decreases as well. Short focal length lenses put you right on top of your subject, potentially scaring away insects and making the lighting of the subject difficult. I also do not use a tripod out in the field as by the time you get it set up, most insects are long out of the area. A supplemental light source (flash) is more practical in the field. The other added benefits are the ability to stop down your lens further & the short duration of the flash will stop motion, be it your own or your subjects. Not to say that there aren't any drawbacks as there are, most notably the spectral highlights (reflections) on some insects eyes or shiny surfaces.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Since most macro shots are taken with manual focues ( and so they should) the speed of the af is pretty meaningless in a macro lens. The 180mm choice is a good choice for macro, as that allows you to work with a relative "long" distance to your subject, but for prortraiture, it is too long, especially, if you consider you're working with a small size sensor camera!

Selene03

Has anyone here used the 35mm micro for Canon crop sensor cameras, the one with the light? It looked interesting, but it seems like you have to be pretty close to your subject? It isn't all that expensive though.

latebloomer Loc: Topeka, KS

The Canon closeup filters are considered by most to be the best closeup filter type lenses. They produce great results. They are not cheap. I know a couple of Nikon shooters who use these Canon lenses. They are pleased with the results. I am not certain they give you 1:1 macro.

You can also reverse a prime to use as a macro.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

I've had good success with this one, and it's in your price range. No IS, though, but I haven't felt I needed it.

https://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF-90mm-2-8-International/dp/B0002232ZG/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1521062928&sr=8-4&keywords=tamron+90mm+macro&dpID=51u97c5VivL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch