Another noob asking for macro lens advice

[deathcake]

Firstly, I'm really, really sorry about this. There are so many threads like this, but the more of them I read the more confused I get. I've read LordV's macro guide - great stuff, by the way, and looked through endless macro lens archives. Still can't make up my mind.

I've pretty much settled for a macro lens around the 100mm reach, and maybe get extension tubes on top of that later, for more than 1 : 1 magnification.

These are the best prices I could find for the following lenses, in Australian dollars.

Tamron 90mm f/2.8 $411.67
Tokina 100mm f/2.8 $487.99 (Only 3 week warranty on this one, and just 1 available from seller)
Canon 60mm f/2.8 $499.99
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 $519.90
Canon 100mm f/2.8 (non-IS) $682.99

It's actually pretty hard to find decent used macro lenses, I've been watching eBay and similar, and the difference between used lens and new lens price is often something like $20 towards the end of the auction. In my recent experience anyway. Also, very few are being sold that are also in perfect or near-perfect condition (on Australian eBay anyway). So I think I'll just go for a new lens.

So price difference between the cheapest - Tamron 90mm and most expensive Canon 100mm is about $250. I could get 2 more nifty fifties for that :p Or put it towards buying a flash, finally. But if that $250 is worth spending fair enough.... The Tamron is cheapest, but I am not finding many example photos. Reviews are best for the Canon 100mm of course. Reviews are varied for the rest, all have better and worse qualities, but pretty minor stuff.

Low/not-controlled light handheld performance is very important to me. Although I'll be getting a flash, I know for a fact that I'll be taking nature, etc (and I do mean the "etc") shots without being able to use the flash or a tripod in the future. Image quality, clarity, sharpness are important as well, and I am willing to pay extra for that - but all of the above lenses seem to be sharp.

Begin able to use it as a portrait/short range telephoto lens would be nice too, but again I can do that with all of the above.

So, any advice? :confused:

[LordV]

Optically you will find virtually no difference in the lenses you have mentioned. I've used a sigma 105 and more recently a Tamron 90mm and been very happy with the results. Some of the lenses you mention extend when focusing which some people do not like (eg Tamron 90 and sigma 105) whilst the canon 100mm does not extend.
If you are after saving some money then I would certainly recommend the Tamron 90mm.
As I've said many times, any differences you see in photographs from the different lenses is more likely down to the photographer than the lens.
Perhaps should add I never use AF for macro so can't comment on the AF performance of the lenses.

Brian v.

[John_B]

deathcake,
Here on the -=TOP TEN=- Which macro lens do you use? (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=160960) the mass majority went for the Canon 100mm f/2.8
It is also the one I would recommend as I have been very happy with mine for over 6 years of use. ;)

[deathcake]

Great, thanks for the responses! :D

I imagine the lens extending might bother insects or animals...but probably not much more than a camera in their face. Not sure if the lack of extension is worth the $250 though. I imagine i would mostly use manual focus as well, though occasional auto focus may come in useful.

[lettershop]

+1 on the Canon 100mm for beginning macro work. The lens doubles as a very sharp lens for portrait work. If you have read enough of LordV's posts then you know that he recommends starting out simple rather than going to something that requires more skill like the MPE-65 lens.

[themadman]

Get the Tamron. It is the least expensive for you and will perform GREAT.

[deathcake]

Gaaah. Still confused. (Sorry, I tend to be really indecisive with things like this...and most other things :lol: )

I've come across this interesting review/test (http://www.nnplus.de/macro/Macro100E.html) which seems to show Tamron as superior to the other macro lenses. Not sure if they just managed to get a good Tamron and slightly worse Canon and Sigma though.

[JBravo920]

I went with the Canon 60mm Macro. You can find them used for around $300, it's sharp as a tack, internal focusing, and when paired with extension tubes it gives you more magnification. Sure, it scares a few bugs off by having to get so close with only a 60mm focal length, but most of them stick around as long as you don't make fast moves and stay relatively quiet. This also makes a great portrait lens as well. I was going to get the Tamron, but then found a good deal on the Canon 60mm and decided to go for it. I'm very happy I did, this lens hardly ever comes off my camera.

[Deep Pocket]

I love my Canon for having excelltn IQ and find myself using it for even non-macro applications.

[SpinningCone]

i will aslo vouch for the canon 100mm. you can get it for cheaper if you use ebay or buy it used. its sharp at 2.8 crazy sharp at f8 internal focus and has pretty good build quality. it also makes a decent sports lens if you dont have a 70-200 2.8

only thing id rather have is the L version with IS

[deathcake]

Went with the Tammy, it arrived yesterday =D I love it, SO SHARP. Probably the sharpest lens I have. The extending bit is a bit confusing, more so than expected but getting used to it already. The only thing that's a bit bothersome is noticeable chromatic aberration at 100% crop.

Test shots are here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/deathcake/sets/72157623407957935/). A 100% crop. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/deathcake/4397468807/sizes/o/in/set-72157623407957935/)

Here's one that everyone seems to like:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2771/4398234106_3106dcb1cd.jpg

Couldn't find the Canon second hand or new for a reasonable price, maybe just my bad luck. Figured i'd use the Tammy and if I really feel that the Canon would be better, sell it in a few months and get the Canon. Heaps of fun so far though, portraits are turning out well also.

[JEC]

The Tamron 90 is a great lens. I doubt you'll be disappointed with the image quality.
My gear bag consists of more than one Canon "L" lens, but the Tamron 90 and 180 are two of my favorites.

[themadman]

The tamron is a great lens, no need for the Canon, one, enjoy it!

[deathcake]

^^ Thanks guys, I definitely am enjoying it =D Took it outside for a couple of hours, and trying to "macro" anything interesting looking at home. The Tammy hasn't left my camera yet!

[competent123]

i am now more confused than i was before.

this is what happens when you read more than you can grasp in one day.

looks like i have to read it again 3-4 times to understand it fully.

[allenfr]

My 100mm is my favorite walk around. Had it for a couple years and it is the first one I usually grab for an afternoon wander. Course, I've also got an MPE65 that gets second choice, but that's not much of a walk around ! LOL

Suggestion: Ask some of the dentists near you if they have any used photograph equipment. Wasn't too long ago, many of the hot shot dentists were taking pictures of their better dental work. Now most seem to use little digital stuff made for the dental profession. So, some have dslrs and the favorite 100mm tucked away collecting dust. I've found two that way.