What Macro Lens

hi all ,
just to ask what macro lens do people use and what would they suggest to buy , as i really like this field of photography and am thinking of purchasing a macro lens , but as always i would like peoples opinions on what one to buy.
many thanks
dave

Depends on your budget. I believe the best bang for your buck is the Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro.

cheers tony ,
just found another thread on the subject that is most helpful.
dave

A significant part of the decision on macro, apart from image quality of one lens vs. another, is what subject you want to shoot and how far away do you want to shoot it from, and how close to lifesize on the film/sensor you want to portray the subject.

A scientist shooting eye of a bee (dead) might use a 30mm macro lens from 3cm, whereas you in your backyard shooting a live bee might want the entire insect but not a closeup of the eye, and you might want to shoot from 10cm from the bee (to avoid angering her!) with a 90mm focal length macro.

If you're using a crop camera, which you seem to be, I can recommend canon's EF-S 60mm f/2.8 (effectively a 96mm macro) very highly. It's cheaper than the 100mm, it was designed for the crop format, and although you do lose some working distance (but not very much, I have to say) it's more than made up for by the fact that it works as an absolutely beautiful, and razor sharp, portrait lens.

There's links to quite a few pictures it took with a 30D in my signature. The lessened working distance has never stopped me from getting close to living subjects. I can only think of two problems with it: one real problem (which is that it tends to hunt and never settle in low light, which you can work around) and one potential problem (it's EF-S, so you'll never use it with a full frame camera should you decide to upgrade).

The bee was a throwaway shot just seeing what the lens could do, hence taken on f/2.8 with no real regard to focus (apologies if image posting is frowned upon in this forum; I'm fairly new here). The web I tried a bit harder for, and I was pleased with the result.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

From my experience there seems to be no such thing as a bad macro. I have previously owned the Tamron 90mm and sigma 180mm macro lenses. Both are good. I borrowed a Sigma 105 and that is good as well. I have not tried the Canon 60mm macro but Ihear it is good as well. I have settled into the Canon 100mm macro and the Canon 180mm macro. The 180mm is the sharpest lens Canon has ever made and loses nothing when used with a teleconverter. It is also an excellent medium telephoto lens for general work. The Canon 100mm lens runs a close second. The 180 mm is very expensive. I was lucky and got a good price used from a guy that got bored with it after a few months. Although all of the lense I have mentioned are good I feel the Canon 100 and 180 definitely have an edge in IQ and general color. If you are going to photograph insects you definitely want a 180 or at least a 100. With the exception of a few groggy late season bees most insects will fly away when you try to shoot them with a short focal length. If you want to shoot small objects, copy printed matter or flowers, a 50 or 60mm macro will be fine.

thanks openc ,
look good to me , will be having a look at that lens.
dave

I'm going forthe sigma 150 macro !

Sir Tony wrote in post #2088444
I believe the best bang for your buck is the Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro.

It's hard to choose a best bang for buck Macro lens since they're all good deals. The Sigma 50 Macro is an excellent optic at the lowest price, but it has its limitations too. If pressed, I'd say the Sigma 150 takes the prize with its longer WD, ring HSM/FTM, tripod collar, robust hood, and top-notch optics. But the Canon 100 would be my choice if I were looking for the 90mm-105mm FL macro, primarily for its inner focusing.

most common macro is the 100mm ish range. Tamron makes a 90mm version that is very sharp. It feels a bit light and plasticky. Tokina makes one that is 100mm as well and it's very good but has a touch more CA wide open. But it's built like a tank. Sigma makes a 105mm one that is cheapest too but may be a touch softer than the others. Canon makes a 100mm macro. It's sharp and the only one that doesn't zoom out as you focus, but it's the most expensive and a hood will cost you another $40, where as the others come with a hood and sometimes a bag as well.

Good luck

Tee Why wrote in post #2088816
most common macro is the 100mm ish range.

Readers should understand that historically 90mm macros were very popular...for 35mm film cameras. So if you have an APS-C (1.6 crop) format dSLR, that translates into something around 60mm for the equivalent framing.