how can I get into macro with little $?

Greetings,

I would really like to get into macro photography, but unfortunately my gear and funds are somewhat limited. I currently have a D60 with the lenses in my sig...

I would really like to get the 100 f2.8macro... but even on ebay they go over $400!

I thought I read somewhere that the 50mm 1.8 I own can be used for macro with the use of some "tubes"? Is that possible? Would the quality of the image be comparable to the 100mm macro?

Thanks!

CHRISTIAN

Tubes are a great way to go and much less than the 100 f/2.8. You can read a review here and then when you do decide to upgrade to the 100 f/2.8 macro, the tubes will get you even closer yet.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …sion-Tube-Set-Review.aspx

i would say to just save up for a while. i have been saving some money here and there so i can pick up some lenses. so i have just enough to get an 85mm 1.8 and the next one will be something more for landscape. and as far as that lens, ill work on figuring that one out later.

thanks for the suggestions!

As for the tubes, I found a reputable ebay seller from Honkong offering the Kenko tube set for $102 shipped! They seem to be around $160+ whatever shipping costs at US vendors...

I'm very tempted to pick these up, although the 100mm is very tempting as well(although it is a whole lot more... about 4 times as $$$) decisions decisions

CHRISTIAN

i say go for the big one regardless because your going to be happier with it in the long run.

Christian you can pick up a reversing ring to mount your 50mm reversed to you camera body.... Challenging, but works very well once mastered and costs no more than about 15 dollars U.S

crotter,
If you can get the 100mm f/2.8 macro then do it! It will be easier and better quality then tubes or reverse mounts and more working room between lens and subject. Not to mention its also a great 100mm telephoto lens. Of course if you can't afford it, a Kenko extension tube set and your 50mm will provide descent results. As a bonus the extension tubes will work in the future when you do get the 100mm f/2.8 macro (gives 2:1 with the macro lens).
Good Luck with your choice

Alex Paul wrote in post #3615016
Christian you can pick up a reversing ring to mount your 50mm reversed to you camera body.... Challenging, but works very well once mastered and costs no more than about 15 dollars U.S

ah yes, I have read about those as well! thanks, ill have to look into that option as well!

I do understand that getting the 100mm macro would be the best option, but unfortunately it is also the priciest! Anyways, I'll be sure to do some reading on all these options before I make my decision.

Anybody know how the 100 f2.8 would compare to the 50mm 1.8 with tubes? Will the 100mm show more detail?

CHRISTIAN

ahh sorry John, I was writing my post when you posted yours, which answered my question about the 50mm vs the 100mm thanks a bunch!

CHRISTIAN

If you are willing to give up electronics functions, you can buy one of the cheap and good old manual lenses, to use with an adapter ring.
I own these two:

Vivitar 105 f/2.5 Macro (made by Kiron, Nikon mount, 1:1 elargement factor)
Tamron 90 f/2.5 SP Macro (Adaptall2 mount, 1:2 elargement factor)

Both are great lenses.

Tiziano

can someone explain what 1:1 and 1:2 and so forth means? Thanks!

Here is an easy way to visualize it... 1:1 or 1/1 lifesize, 1:2 or 1/2 1:3 or 1/3 1:4 or1/4 1:1 1/1 Lifesize 2:1 or 2/1 = 2 times life size 3:1 or 3/1 4:1 or 4/1 5:1 or 5/1 = 5 times life size. Does that work for you?? What seems logical to me may not to you or anyone else for that matter .. take care

Get yourself an M42 to EOS adapter, an M42 lens like Super-Tak 50mm, and some M42 tubes. Less than $100 all in.

(Ignore the sensor turds)

http://i14.photobucket​.com …o/misc/2007-07-26-001.jpg

So does "lifesize" mean the subject in the image is to scale with its actual size?

Sorry still a bit fuzzy on the terminology...

Would the 100mm 2.8 macro allow for extreme closeups, like an insects eye detail for example?

thanks!

Christian

crotter wrote in post #3617196
So does "lifesize" mean the subject in the image is to scale with its actual size?

Sorry still a bit fuzzy on the terminology...

Would the 100mm 2.8 macro allow for extreme closeups, like an insects eye detail for example?

thanks!

Christian

Yes Life size and 1:1 both mean 1cm of subject gives 1cm of image on the sensor.
Brian V.