As previously stated, there are many ways to "do macro"... or at least close-ups:
Several ways might be possible with lenses you already have.
Add a diopter lens to the front of the lens. It fits like a filter, but increases magnification (lens cannot focus to infinity, while the diopter is installed). The cheap "close-up" filters... often $25 or less for a set... are mostly utter crap and will spoil image quality. Better two-element diopters such as Canon's 250D and 500D are quite a bit better. The 250D is the stronger of the two and is recommended for focal lengths between about 50mm and 135mm, while the 500D is recommended for lenses 70mm and longer, if memory serves. The problem is the quality diopters aren't cheap and they are relatively lens-specific. They also cost some image quality and can be prone to flare (use a lens hood and be prepared to post-process to recover contrast and color saturation in images).
Or, add a "macro extension tube" behind the lens to make it closer focusing. These come in different lengths and are sold both singly and in sets. Canon's "Mark II" and most current third party can be used with both EF and EF-S lenses. Some older ones cannot be used with EF-S lenses. These are generally used with lenses 35mm and longer. The longer the focal length, the more extension that's needed to significantly increase lens magnification.
Canon sells high quality, individual tubes only: 12mm for around $80 and 25mm for around $150. Kenko offers a set of three (12mm, 20mm & 36mm) with close to the same quality for around $125. There are even cheaper from Opteka and Zeikos that sell for around $75 or less. The latter, in particular, sells under a whole bunch of different brand names (Vivitar, Bower, ProOptic and many more). The Opteka might be selling under other names, too (Vello?) and includes 12, 20 and 36mm size tubes. The sizes of the Zeikos are a bit odd: 13mm, 21mm and 31mm. The Opteka and Zeikos are both a bit more plasticky than the Canon and Kenko. I think the lens latching mechanism and release button is a little more secure on the Canon and Kenko, too. There is even a set of "economy" tubes costing less (around $40?) from Zeikos with plastic bayonet mount!
All the above extension tubes have electronic contacts to support both autofocus and aperture control with modern lenses. They'll also work fine with vintage lenses, if you happen to use any of those (adapted for use on Canon cameras, of course).
There also are very cheap macro extension tubes without any electronic contacts... $25 or less for a set, many different brand names. These don't support either autofocus or aperture control with modern lenses. It's often easier to manual focus macro shots anyway... But you do need to be able to stop the lens down. So I don't recommend these really cheap tubes for anything other than vintage lenses that have a built in, manual aperture control ring. Even then, it will be slower to work with and when stopped down, the camera's viewfinder can get pretty dim and harder to work with (Live View with Exposure Simulation enabled can help).
There also are "helicoids" and "bellows", both of which are essentially adjustable extension tubes. Recently a helicoid with an adjustment range around 45mm to 65mm has been offered to fit Canon, that has electronic contacts. That's a fairly large amount of extension, so would be most applicable for longer telephoto lenses (probably 135mm and up). I haven't used this approx. $110 helicoid, so can't say how well it works and don't know if it's a quality item. Bellows are even longer and used for even higher magnifications... up to 5:1 or 6:1 in some cases, with certain lenses. However, affordable ones do not have any electronic contacts, so there's no autofocus or aperture control and they might be best used with vintage lenses only. Novoflex has offered bellows with electronic connectivity, but they're quite pricey (ISTR they were upwards of $1000, last time I looked).
I have seen an interesting extension tube/lens reversing mount recently that is fairly affordable and has a means of maintaining communication between camera and lens, selling for a bit over $100. Reversing is another technique (as mentioned in another post), usually for very high magnification with lenses between 35mm and 135mm focal length. It can be done very inexpensively with a simple reversing ring.... but that doesn't support lens aperture control or autofocus... so it might be best to get a vintage lens especially to work with this way.
Of the above, I use macro extension tubes a lot. I have three Canon tubes and a Kenko set, and some are always in my camera bags when I'm out shooting. I learned many years ago (shooting with other systems) that they are versatile and very handy to have on hand, for many reasons. I also have a 77mm 500D diopter, but it's mostly just used with my 70-200/2.8 lens and is convenient, but even so it's not something I use a lot. There is some loss of IQ with any added optics.
Another method is to reverse/stack lenses. In this case a short to moderate telephoto is mounted to the camera normally (giving normal aperture control), while a second, shorter focal length is reversed and attached to the front of it. In effect, the reversed lens up front is acting as a sort of diopter... and a pretty high quality one at that. I don't do this with my current Canon EOS/EF kit, but have used the technique in previous systems. Ideally, the base lens is one in the 85mm, 100mm or 135mm focal length range, then the reversed lens is a 28mm or 35mm with the same filter thread size (some slight differences in diameter might be handled with step rings). A special, but inexpensive male-to-male threaded attaching ring is used between the lenses. The front lens is used at it's largest aperture, usually with focus set to infinity (though that's somewhat adjustable, depending upon the particular lens)... while focus and aperture control are done with the base lens. At one time I used a Canon FD 28mm and either a 100mm or 135mm (I forget which), both of which had 52mm filter threads, this way. In my Canon kit, it would probably be possible to do with either an EF 24/2.8 or 28/1.8 and a 100/2, both of which use 58mm filters. This can be a good, "macro on the cheap" solution for someone with a couple of the right prime lenses in their kit already. But I wouldn't recommend it with zooms and wouldn't suggest going out and seeking lenses just for this purpose because you might end up buying several and experimenting before you find a combo that works well.
Finally, another "macro on the cheap" method I've heard of is to remove the front element from one of the "standard" zooms... I think it's a 24-90 or 28-90mm.. Then just mount it normally and that works pretty well ad a macro lens. The lens won't be able to focus to infinity anymore, after it's modified. And I'm not entirely sure what Canon lens was recommended for the purpose. If interested, I bet you could find more info with a search here on the forums or elsewhere on the Internet.
Teleconverters also can be used to enhance the close-up capabilities of lenses, too, BTW. While extension tubes without any optics actually "force" lenses focus closer, teleconverters (Canon calls them Extenders, which can lead to some confusion) don't change the lens' closest focusing distance at all. Instead a TC changes the lens focal length and in the process reduces its angle of view and increases its optical magnification potential. There is some loss of light to "fall off" in extension tubes, when light has to travel farther. But it's not a lot and the camera's metering system compensates. With a teleconverter, there's greater loss of light (one stop with a 1.4X TC and two stops with a 2X), both to the added distance and the extra optics. Depending upon the particular lens/TC combination, autofocus may not be possible and the viewfinder may be quite dim. And, Canon's own teleconverters (Extenders) are top quality, but have protruding front elements that limit their use to only certain lenses (they recommend only 135mm and longer primes, plus their 70-200 and 100-400mm zooms... but some folks have used them successfully on a few shorter focal lengths). Third party teleconverters, such as those from Kenko, Tamron and Sigma, mostly don't have protruding front lens elements so can physically be mounted to more lenses. However, image quality and focus performance may suffer a little or a lot, depending upon the particular combination of lens and TC. There are a huge number of possible combos, but if you are interested in trying this and narrow it down to one or two candidates, repost and try to find someone using the exact combo you're considering, to get some feedback.
A true "macro" lens is more likely be the fastest and easiest... and perhaps the most fun to use. They are typically "flat field" design for very close focus, to give better edge-to-edge sharpness and less vignetting than is possible when forcing a non-macro lens to focus closer, using the above methods. There are lots and lots of good macro lenses... and usually the least of your concerns with them is image quality. Nearly all are capable of making superb images.
If you consider buying a macro lens used, there are literally millions of excellent, fully manual ones that can easily be adapted for use on your camera. The Canon EOS mount is one of the most versatile for adapted lenses. Most of the common vintage mounting systems can be adapted... It's easier to tell you what can't be very easily adapted, including old Minolta MD, Konica K/AR & F mount, and Canon's own FL/FD bayonet. However, for macro work in particular, even many of those lenses are usable. The main problem with adapting them is that they cannot focus to infinity, which isn't an issue when shooting macro.
There are adapters available for virtually all the more common mounts, so that the lenses can be fitted and used on Canon EOS cameras. There also were a lot of interchangeable mount lenses made in the past. Tamron's Adaptall were mentioned in a previous post. There also are so-called T-mount and other, more sophisticated interchangeable mount systems from various manufacturers. Instead of adapting them, these lenses actually were designed from new with an interchangeable mount, so that they could be sold to fit many different systems. You bought the lens, then you bought the separate mount that was appropriate for your particular system. (Also handy for folks who used two or more different systems, so that the lenses could be swapped back and forth. The Tamron Adaptall were popular with newspapers, for example, in their staff photographer "lens pools", since the photographers often used different systems.)
All adapted and interchangeable mount lenses will need to be used fully manually.... both focus and aperture control. As such, they'll be not quite as versatile as and a bit slower to work with than most modern, AF-capable lenses designed specifically for your camera.
I have used a lot of different macro lenses over the years and currently have five in my Canon kit. Here's what I use, why I chose them and some comments about each:
Tamron SP 60mm f2.0... This is a modern, AF capable lens. It's quite compact and its f2.0 aperture is a full stop bigger than most macro lenses offer. IMO, this makes it better for dual purpose: macro (of course) and non-macro, especially portraiture in this case. It is a fairly compact that tucks nicely into the corner of my camera bag and doesn't add much weight. It's a "crop only" lens that would be fine on your camera. It is a little more expensive than the Canon EF-S 60/2.8, which also likely has faster autofocus thanks to it's USM. The Tamron uses a slower micro motor, but its f2 aperture decided it for me (and I got it on sale at price about the same as the Canon, at the time). Most modern macro lenses should be expected to focus slower than non-macro. Macro lenses use "long throw" focus mechanisms, which emphasize precision over speed. This is because depth of field can be very shallow at high magnifications. Both the Canon and Tamron 60mm macro lenses are "IF" or "internal focus", which means that the lens doesn't grow longer when focused closer... Some macro lenses double length or more, when focused to their highest magnification, which cuts into working distance. IF lenses also might maintain balance a bit better than non-IF, whether handheld or on a tripod. OTOH, IF lenses start out a little larger. The Canon EF-S 60/2.8 also is IF. The Tamron comes with a matching lens hood, while with the Canon it's sold separately.
Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8... This is an ultra-high magnification macro lens that I don't recommend for general purpose or most folks trying macro for the first time. It picks up where most macro lenses stop.... at 1:1. In fact, that's the least magnification that can be done with it and it goes as high as 5:1 (5X life size). It's manual focus only (but has an electronically controlled aperture). It's pretty much tripod-only. Depth of field at these high magnifications is extremely shallow... fractions of a millimeter (learn to to focus stacking!). The "effective aperture" changes when focused closer. Set to it's minimum f16, set to full 5:1 it acts more like an extremely tiny f90! And the MP-E 65mm extends when focused closer.... a lot! All in all, it's a rather specialized lens that is slower and more difficult to work with. But it sort of takes the place of a bellows in the modern Canon system and is an amazing lens that can fill a viewfinder with a single grain of rice, or do tight "portraits" of a house fly's face!
Tamron SP 90mm f2.5.... Mine is a vintage, manual focus Adaptall2 lens that I bought used and cheap, though it was in great "like new" condition with all its accessories. I've used several of these over the years and knew they are excellent, so jumped right on it when I saw it for a mere $20 at a local second-hand store. It came with a Nikon F Adaptall mount installed and I could have used that with a Nikon-EOS adapter. Instead I got a chipped Adaptall-EOS mount from China for $40 shipped. (I have other Adaptall2 mounts for vintage film camera systems in my collection, so can use this and other Tamron Adaptall lenses on any of them: Canon FD, Konica, Olympus, Pentax, and some more). This is the 1980s pre-cursor to the Tamron SP 90mm AF lenses available today, for more money, of course. Both the vintage, manual focus f2.5 versions of the Tammy 90mm are 1:2 lenses. They don't focus all the way to 1:1 on their own. This often is plenty of magnification, but dedicated 1:1 adapter was included... or a simple macro extension tube can be used to similar effect. This or any other interchangeable mount or adapted vintage, manual focus lens must have an aperture control ring on the lens itself, to be practical to use on a modern EOS camera. Tammy currently offers two 90mm AF lenses, both of which are usable on both full frame and crop cameras, and both of which are excellent lenses capable of full 1:1 magnification. The older Tamron SP 90mm f2.8 AF Di is a very good lens for around $500, that's not IF, but has a two-stage focus limiter. About 50% more expensive, the newer Tamron SP 90mm AF Di VC USD is an upgraded version that adds image stabilization as well as faster ultrasonic type focus drive, and is an IF design with a three-stage focus limiter.
Canon EF 100mm f2.8 USM... Is one of two 100mm macro lenses that Canon currently offers. Mine is the less expensive version and is easily my most used macro lens, with pretty much every important feature I would want in a versatile macro lens. It's 1:1 capable and IF. It also has faster USM AF drive, as well as a two-stage focus limiter, both of which help focus performance, especially when using the lens for non-macro purposes, as a moderately short telephoto. This and the other, more expensive Canon 100mm f2.8L IS USM (which adds image stabilization and has an upgraded three-stage focus limiter) are the only macro lenses shorter than 150mm that I'm aware of that can be optionally fitted with a tripod mounting ring. That ring is a very useful and important feature to me since I use a tripod or at least a monopod a lot when shooting macro, so I chose to spend my money on the optional tripod ring, instead of the more expensive model with IS. In fact, while the Canon Hybrid-IS on the 100L is likely the most effective stabilization on any macro lens, it's still of limited value. By the time you are focused to 1:1, IS probably only gives about one stop of assistance. Still, that's better than most other macro lenses, where stabilization gives less or even almost no assistance at 1:1. On all stabilized macro lenses, it's considerably more effective at non-macro focusing distances.
For someone wanting their first and/or only macro lens, I recommend one in the 90mm, 100mm, 105mm range. On either crop or full frame, this is a good compromise of handholdabilty and working distance. Shorter focal lengths put you closer to your subject, while longer ones become significantly harder to hold steady at high magnifications. Alternative choices are the Tokina AT-X Pro 100/2.8 FX (one of the least expensive macros, with quality optics but less other features), Tamron 90mm lenses already mentioned, or the Sigma 105mm f2.8 DG OS HSM. The Canon 100/2.8 USM doesn't come with a lens hood and the matching one is rather large. A matched hood is included with the Canon 100L and all the other manufacturers' offerings.
Canon EF 180mm f3.5L USM... This is another great macro lens, but perhaps more "macro-only" and "tripod-only" than some of the shorter focal lengths. I use it when shooting particularly shy subjects, or ones that bite or sting, and more working distance is nice. But it's harder to get a steady shot with such a long focal length. And even with USM this lens is slower auto focusing than the shorter Canon macro lenses, so is less useful for non-macro shooting. It comes with a matched lens hood and a tripod ring (making it more expensive to start with). Alternative choices are the Sigma 150mm f2.8 DG OS HSM, as well as both Sigma and Tamron 180mm f2.8.
I also have several non-macro lenses in my kit that I find useful for near-macro/close-up purposes:
Canon TS-E 45mm f2.8.... This is one of four Tilt-Shift lenses that Canon offers. The 45mm and the Canon TS-E 90mm f2.8 have a lot of close-up uses where the lens movements can be helpful. (IMO, the wider 24mm and 17mm TS-E lenses don't have as much close-up usefulness.) All these are manual focus (but have full aperture control) and I particularly use the 45mm on crop camera for table-top studio, small-product photography. If I were shooting those with my full frame camera, I'd probably want the 90mm instead. These two TS-E are fairly close focusing on their own, plus can be used with macro extension tubes, if needed. Besides the lens movements (which control plane of focus and perspective), a shorter lens like these is helpful in a studio setting, with inanimate subjects, where closer working distances are not only okay, but can be helpful. I can reach out and adjust the subject while keeping my eye to the viewfinder. When you have one day to photograph 200 small items and want to get several different shots of each for a client to choose among, being able to very quickly arrange each shot can be very important. So, work in-studio and with inanimate subjects may be an exception to the point above, about too-short working distances, and shorter focal lengths can be a positive.
Canon EF 300mm f4L IS USM... Is the closest focusing of any Canon lens longer than 200mm. It's very fast focusing and can be quite useful with particularly shy or dangerous small subjects... such as butterflies, small reptiles, etc. While it can do close to 1/3 life size on it's own, it also can be used with a macro extension tube to be able to magnify more.
Canon EF 24-70/2.8L, EF 70-200/2.8L and EF 70-200/4L... Sometimes a zoom is helpful. Or you just don't have a macro lens with you when a close-up opportunity presents itself. All three of these are fairly close focusing (especially the 24-70), and can be made more-so with macro extension tubes.
Actually, over the years I've "done macro" and close-ups occasionally with lots of different lenses. A few standouts:
I've used as wide as a 20mm lens, paired up with a 12mm extension tube, to get more depth of field than is usually possible. Flower petals were in focus when touching the front element of the lens! That's about as little working distance as possible. (Any shorter focal length or any longer extension and the subjects would need to be inside the lens, to focus on them.)
Canon 50mm f1.4 with an extension tube gives an interesting center-focused, softer-edged image with some significant vignetting as well. That might be a problem for some shots, but also can be a very useful effect that can be partially controlled by the aperture chosen. A larger aperture increases the effect, while smaller reduces it.
The vintage Tamron 500mm f8 "mirror" lens is one of the best of this type lens and is amazingly close-focusing... to within 5 feet if memory serves. As such, it can be used for highly compressed close-ups with very strongly blurred down backgrounds. The lens aperture is fixed in this lens (exposure is adjusted using neutral density filters of various strengths), so depth of field is only varied by distance to the subject, etc. In a sense, that makes for pretty simply, WYSIWYG shooting! Tripod or monopod is pretty much mandatory, but the lens has a tripod mounting ring (removeable, unfortunately, because Tammy 500/8 often can be found missing the ring, which is difficult to replace since the lens was discontinued many years ago).
Finally, lighting for macro may be another important consideration. Often you will struggle to get enough light to be able to use a small enough aperture, while avoiding too slow shutter speeds and/or too high ISO. Some sort of supplemental light might be the only way to get the shot. In studio, I've used larger strobes, smaller continuous lighting sources, and even longer exposures with ambient light, using diffusers, reflectors and flags to control it. Some of these can be used in the field, while others aren't practical and some sort of portable flash might be needed.
I can and often do simply use a single, standard portable flash (Canon 550EX and 580EX II, though any Canon or third party flash might do). It might be mounted on a special bracket that tilts to allow for close-ups or, more often, just handheld while attached to the camera via an off-camera shoe cord. This works surprisingly well, perhaps because to a tiny subject the big old flash is sort of like a giant softbox in the sky. Rather than harsh shadows, the light almost seems to "wrap around" the subject, and a bounce card can be used for even more fill of the shadow side, if wanted. By itself a full-size flash would over-power such a close subject... So I MacGuyver it with a few layers of white gauze bandage held in place over the flash head by rubber bands, to both reduce the flash output and diffuse it a bit more. I bet someone sells flash accessories for this purpose, but this works fine for me.
There are also dedicated macro flashes available. Two major types are ring lights and twin lights. I use both the Canon ML-14 Ring Lite and the Canon MT-24EX Twin Lite. Canon macro lenses all either have or can be fitted with mounting systems for these specialty flashes. To me, a ring light flash, which mounts on the front of the lens, gives a sort of too-flat, clinical look to images less than 1:1 or even 2:1 magnification. I mostly use it for higher magnification work with the MP-E 65mm lens. The Twin Lite gives nicer light qualities, IMO, for much macro and close-up work I do, at less extreme magnifications. It also can be mounted directly to the lens, but I use mine on a dual flash bracket instead (a now-discontinued Lepp/Stroboframe bracket), because that gives me a lot more flexibility with placement of each of the flash heads. Note: Both these Canon macro flash units have full ETTL capabilities and come with fittings for the Canon lenses that use 58mm filters. For Canon lenses that use smaller or larger filter sizes, or for third party lenses, adapters are available allowing the Canon flashes to be mounted on the lens.
There also are portable, continuous forms of lighting now.... Small LED panels, for example. I have tried these yet, so can't really comment, but they are an intriguing alternative. They might be necessary if wanting to shoot macro video with your DSLR.
Hope this helps! Have fun shopping.
p.s. Speaking of millionaires, Richard Branson - founder and owner of Virgin Records, Virgin Mobile and Virgin Airlines - offered a bit of advice for wannabes... "The best way to become a millionaire airline owner is to start out as a billionaire." I suppose something similar might be said about photographers (though in much smaller dollar figures, I'm sure).
Permanent ban
