Which lens?
Dec 19, 2017 22:49:55 #
whitehall
Loc: Canada
As I am moving into macro photography I am keen to acquire a dedicated true macro lens. I am a canon shooter so my first inclination is to purchase the canon 100 mm L lens, but I have seen great reviews suggesting that the new 017 tamron 90 mm lens is ecellent. Any recommendation woul be very much welcome. Thanks.
IGW
IGW
Dec 20, 2017 02:06:40 #
i dont know of any bad macro lenses,i shoot sigma 180 on my canon and sigma150 on my nikon.i have others but those are my favorite.both are the older ones without OS
Dec 20, 2017 05:47:57 #
Dec 20, 2017 07:06:45 #
Dec 20, 2017 07:49:47 #
whitehall wrote:
Thanks
They are all good, the longer focal lengths are a little more difficult to work with handheld as motion blur is more difficult to control but a good flash solution helps to solve that problem. You can buy a used Canon 100, either the L or the USM version generally at a very reasonable price, if you want a longer lens the Sigma 150 would be a good place to start. I own the Canon 100 USM, the Sigma 150 OS, and the Canon 180, and I really would not consider the image quality of any one to be better than the other.
Dec 20, 2017 08:42:13 #
Dec 20, 2017 08:45:15 #
Dec 20, 2017 08:48:13 #
Optically, any true macro lens will give you good results as long as your technique is good. The differences in price are normally due to additional features & build quality.Personally, My go to macro lens is an older manual focus 105mm macro from my film days. Even though I have like 8-9 different AF & MF macro lenses from 55 to 180mm....
Dec 20, 2017 08:53:09 #
Dec 20, 2017 09:15:29 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
Even though I have like 8-9 different AF & MF macro lenses from 55 to 180mm....
your sick
you have more than i do.i'm going shopping 
Dec 20, 2017 09:25:45 #
The advice you are getting is spot on. Canon, Sigma, Tamron macros are all great. Longer ones like a 180mm give you a longer working distance to get to 1:1 mag, and the advantage for that is that some critters won't be scared off. As said, the minus might be they are bit more challenging with camera movement. Don't know of any in that length that have image stabilization.
I'm going shopping too, but the wife does not know it yet. Shhhhh...
I'm going shopping too, but the wife does not know it yet. Shhhhh...
Dec 20, 2017 11:47:03 #
Dec 20, 2017 18:31:56 #
Mark Sturtevant wrote:
The advice you are getting is spot on. Canon, Sigma, Tamron macros are all great. Longer ones like a 180mm give you a longer working distance to get to 1:1 mag, and the advantage for that is that some critters won't be scared off. As said, the minus might be they are bit more challenging with camera movement. Don't know of any in that length that have image stabilization.
I'm going shopping too, but the wife does not know it yet. Shhhhh...
I'm going shopping too, but the wife does not know it yet. Shhhhh...
Image stabilization really doesn't work when shooting macro... but it does come in handy when using the lens for other purposes.
Dec 20, 2017 21:12:45 #
Dec 20, 2017 21:24:47 #
latebloomer wrote:
Research the Tolina 100 mm. You will not be disappointed.
That is a great lens, the only problem with it is that it extends as it increases magnification which could draw dust and moisture inside, but hey, my first macro lens was the old Canon 100mm of the same design and it was wonderful. If the OP pays attention here on the forum I am sure that he can get a pretty good deal on a Macro lens, I purchased my 100 USM here in like new condition for $275.. Didn't really need it but it was too good of a deal to not make the buy. I have old manual lenses that I have paid that much for.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.