DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Macro lens - cheapish?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 9 of 9, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/04/2008 09:29:15 AM · #1
Ok so currently I have a Sigma 70-300mm DG Macro lens and although it's probably the cheapest lens in the world it does take some decent pictures. However, most of the comments i've been getting have suggested 'getting closer' to the subject which the sigma won't allow me to do (focusing distance and whatnot)

I do really love macro shots, always have - but my budget is somewhat limited (most of it goes back into the business/saving for downpayment on a home) so could anyone recommend a quasi decent macro lens that would allow me to get nearer the subjects?

Thanks!
06/04/2008 09:53:24 AM · #2
The sigma gives you 1:2 "macro" focusing, where "true" macro is defined as 1:1. 1:1 means an image on the sensor is exactly the same size as it is in real life: if you were shooting film you could overlay the processed negative on the object directly and they'd be the same size. Obviously, when you view the image on the screen what you're seeing is MUCH larger than life size.

Now, 1:2 is about the standard for inexpensive, so-called "macro lenses. The Tamron 28-75mm (an excellent lens, btw), for example, goes 1:2 and also bills itself as a macro lens, just like your Sigma does. I'm not familiar with the performance of the Sigma, but I do know this:

I own a Canon 60mm EFS macro lens (a true-macro, 1:1 lens, tack-sharp, outstanding in every way) and the Tamron 28-75mm both, and I find that I very rarely use the Canon at 1:1. I mean, that's REALLY close-in. Seriously close. Of course, a lot of people are doing extreme macro and going even closer than that (all those "bug eyes" shots, for example), but I don't do that kind of stuff much and probably never will. So, realistically, *most* of what I shoot with my macro lens could just as well be shot with the Tamron.

And, honestly, there's not that much difference in the quality of the results, especially when viewed at DPC sizes.

So, if I absolutely *had* to get rid of one of my lenses, the 60mm macro would be the one to go... I could get by 90% of the time with the 1:2 macro range, especially when you consider that cropping is always an option to "move closer".

Anyway, to answer your original question, I'm not aware of any "true macro" lens for Canon of any quality at all that runs less tha, say, $300 or so. Someone may prove me wrong, though.

R.

Message edited by author 2008-06-04 17:52:18.
 06/04/2008 09:55:48 AM · #3
Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 macro - $250:
The EF 50mm f/2.5 macro is a fairly unexciting lens but it offers a very high performance despite its ancient design. The quality of the construction is fairly decent though not stellar. By today's standards the micro motor as well is a little outdated. Same goes for the life-size converter which is needed to achieve a 1:1 magnification. The new EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM macro has been improved in these respects - at higher costs and with reduced image circle.

So if you're looking for an affordable, high performance standard lens with macro capabilities the EF 50mm f/2.5 macro can still be recommended.

Optical Quality: very good
Mechanical Quality: good/average
Price/Performance: very good

Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM macro - $370:
So they do exist - high-performance lenses with an reduced image circle. The Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM macro delivers an almost flawless performance. The lens is capable to provide very sharp border-to-border results with minimal distortions and low CAs. The bokeh (out-of-focus blurr) is exceptionally smooth. The only dirty spot on its otherwise clean vest is high vignetting at f/2.8 towards infinity focus but one stop down the issue is pretty much resolved. So combined with its high build quality, very fast AF and a pretty affordable price the only verdict can be ... highly recommended!

Optical Quality: very good
Mechanical Quality: very good
Price/Performance: very good

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM macro - $455:
The old EF 100mm f/2.8 macro lens had a superb reputation but Canon managed to keep up the performance of the USM successor despite of the introduction of a true IF design allowing to keep a constant lens length throughout the focus range. Mechanically this is a drastic improvement due to the absence of any moving outer parts that could suck in dust or wear out more easily. On top of that the USM implementation in this lens is excellent - compared to conventional macro lenses in this range it is a speed daemon here and a near silent one. Optically the lens resides on a very high level with little to nothing to be desired. HIGHLY recommended!

Optical Quality: very good
Mechanical Quality: very good
Price/Performance: very good

Canon EF 180mm f/3.5 L USM macro - $1,300:
The Canon EF 180mm f/3.5 USM L macro is an interesting lens with a very good optical performance and exceptional mechanical qualities. Nonetheless the lens wasn't really able to fulfill the high expectations associated with a Canon L grade lens - there're even some zoom lenses performing better in terms of resolution. Beyond the resolution aspect the lens showed pretty perfect performance figures - minimal vignetting, next to non-existent distortions and marginal chromatic aberration. The bokeh, the quality of the out-of-focus blur is relatively decent although not stellar. The AF performance of the lens is a bit of a mixed bag. If the in-focus point is in a relatively close proximity to the current setting the AF is fast. However, if the camera has no guidance where to go the AF is extremely slow. That said AF speed isn't really relevant for pure macro photography where you tend to use manual focusing anyway. Macro photographers will certainly appreciate the "true" IF design (constant physical length) as well as the increased working distance compared to the EF 100mm f/2.8 USM macro. If macro capabilities aren't on your wish list you may prefer to look elsewhere though.

Optical Quality: good
Mechanical Quality: excellent
Price/Performance: good



06/04/2008 09:56:08 AM · #4
If you want to try macro on a budget, then rather than getting a macro lens (not cheap!) you can try one of the alternatives:
- Extension tubes (fit between your camera body and lens, don't contain any optics)
- Close-up filters (fit onto the front of your lens. Not as good as extension tubes)

You should be able to find either in good camera shops or on the second-hand market.
06/04/2008 10:00:39 AM · #5
I would definitely look into some extension tubes. I have a 36mm Kenko extension tube that I love because it lets me do some pretty good macro with a similar lens to the one you have. I know both Canon and Kenko make a set of extension tubes but the Canon ones are a good bit more expensive and since neither have glass in them, their is no difference in picture quality so I went with Kenko. You can get a set on eBay for a little over 100 and I would definitely recommend them.
 06/04/2008 10:21:09 AM · #6
If you want to try macro, I'll second (or third) the recommendation to try either screw on filters or extension tubes.

PM me if you're interested in a set of close up filters, I have a set I don't use since I got extension tubes.
 06/04/2008 10:22:22 AM · #7
Originally posted by Bujanx:
Ok so currently I have a Sigma 70-300mm DG Macro lens and although it's probably the cheapest lens in the world it does take some decent pictures. However, most of the comments i've been getting have suggested 'getting closer' to the subject which the sigma won't allow me to do (focusing distance and whatnot)

I do really love macro shots, always have - but my budget is somewhat limited (most of it goes back into the business/saving for downpayment on a home) so could anyone recommend a quasi decent macro lens that would allow me to get nearer the subjects?

Thanks!


For low budget, you might want to try extension tubes to put between lens and body. The cheapest 'real' (i.e. 1:1) macro lens I know of is the Sigma 50/2.8 ($260) or the Canon EF-S 60/2.8 ($400)
 06/04/2008 01:27:06 PM · #8
Wow thanks for all the info guys! This is why I love DCP.

I'm going to look into some extension tubes first, and then take it from there!

thanks!
06/04/2008 04:24:18 PM · #9
Although extension tubes and macro filters are a great place to start, unfortunately your lens might not be the best to add things like extension tubes and macro filters to. Ratings of your lens are "sub-average in the true sense" in all categories. Extension tubes and macro filters are not going to make your lens any more sharp. If you want to go this route, I would suggest you start with the filters - maybe something like this kit for around $30. You can use one or stack them.

In the long run, if you are into macro stuff, you will probably really enjoy one of the primes maybe the 60mm or the 100mm from the list provided previously.

Good luck and enjoy!
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/28/2025 05:21:22 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/28/2025 05:21:22 AM EST.