Macro vs Non-Macro whats the differnce beside how closeI can get?

I am planning to buy a new lens. I see lenses which are marked Macro what does this les have in common with it's counter part non-macro type lenses? I know for instance that these macro lenses are good for close up work, but what about using as it's the same as it's counterpart?

Thanks,
Russ

Often lenses with "macro" written on them are just markerting people showing their intelligence. Real macro lenses do 1:1 or better. My Tamron 28-75 has "macro" written on it, but it's 1:3 and the minimum focus distance is a lot further away than my Canon macro lens.

The main difference really is just that you can focus on something a lot closer than a non-macro lens.

I always thought a larger focus distance was preferrable for Macro lenses. 1:1 is still a necessity for a true Macro lens though. The longer distance is quite nice when you are photographing something rather twitchie...like insects...esp those with stingers.

FlipsidE

A lot of Canon lenses have the macro (flower icon) text written on the side of the barrel, but they are not true macro lenses (1:1). A good example is the 28-105 USM that I use to own. It says macro but I was unable to get anything better than 1:3 approx. True Canon macro lenses include the 65, 100 and 180mm. The 50mm is a macro lens but it will only get you 1:2 ratio. You have to get an extension adapter to get it to 1:1. A good all-around macro lens is the 100 2.8. It does wonders for portraits too.

I use the 100 f2.8 macro for macro and for portraits. I love the detail I get in the portraits. On the macro side it is stunning although, I am ashamed to find grime on household things I thought were clean!

Hey, Thanks to you all. You were very helpfull