First macro lens?

Im considering getting a new lens. Im thinking I want something longer than my current lens (24-70L), but was also thinking that if it were macro also, that would be fun and versatile.

which lens would you recommended? I was thinking maybe the 100mm 2.8 Macro?

I have a 5D and was in the market for a macro. I couldn't afford nor could I justify the cost of the 100L so I went for the 100 f/2.8. My lens is ver sharp. I have used it for macro shots, and for studio portraits. I am very happy with the 100 f/2.8.

~Dom

Sigma 105
Tamron 90
Tokina 100
Canon 100 (non-L)

They are all reasonably priced lenses and work well. I like the 90-105mm range for general macro. Not too long but still some working distance.

OpticalPrime wrote in post #11907784
Im considering getting a new lens. Im thinking I want something longer than my current lens (24-70L), but was also thinking that if it were macro also, that would be fun and versatile.

which lens would you recommended? I was thinking maybe the 100mm 2.8 Macro?

that would be good, as well as the Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro

I have the Tamron 90mm 2.8 and love it.

100mm 2.8 non IS am amazing lens and a really good price these days

aaron_400d wrote in post #11908005
100mm 2.8 non IS am amazing lens and a really good price these days

+1. Yes the L is better but only marginally so for macro work, but it's quite a bit more expensive. I have had my 100 F2.8 (non L macro) for about 4 years now and am not planning on moving!

aaron_400d wrote in post #11908005
100mm 2.8 non IS am amazing lens and a really good price these days

I see it going used for under $400. Great lens and great price.

Tokina 100 2.8. I had it for a short while and it was a superb lens (only sold it because priorities/life changed)

Have you considered reversed lens macro? It'll be a lot of fun in my opinion. Especially with that 50mm. Plus the mount ring to make it happen literally costs like 10 bucks. Just a suggestion.

The 100 2.8 macro is an awesome lens. I can't imagine needing something better at that focal length for macros. It does pretty good as a non-macro lens too.

Hi, I saw a reviewof Sigma 90mm macro. Yet I don't find it on this forum, and it's not easily found elsewhere. Is it no longer produced? Is it a good macro lens though?

I have the standard 100 f/2.8 macro and am very happy with it. It seems to be a good lens, and is not obscenely expensive.

-Pat

I picked up a mint copy of the Canon 100 f/2.8 macro a few months ago and couldn't be happier. That said, any of the lenses themadman listed above will work great. The only thing you might want to keep in mind is that I don't believe the Tokina lens is internal focusing if that is important to you.

colormaniac wrote in post #11954310
Hi, I saw a reviewof Sigma 90mm macro. Yet I don't find it on this forum, and it's not easily found elsewhere. Is it no longer produced? Is it a good macro lens though?

I have a probably stupid question. Now I've got an extension tube. And my MF lens is prime, not zoom. I find that I can only take pictures of an object within a narrow range of camera-to-object distance. Within that range, maybe just about one inch, I can adjust to get the best focus. But outside of that range, I can never get the object in focus. Is that normal?