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

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Macro Lens - Any sugessions?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 17 of 17, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/16/2005 09:58:36 AM · #1
I am looking for a not too 'pricy' macro lens that works well in avg lighting conditions for my canon 300D. Any sugessions? I live in UK so a link for models available locally will help.

Mostly would like to shoot some insects , Aquarium shots and other objects while doing creative photography. You can checkout some shots that I have tried earlier using my 70 - 300 mm telephoto with the macro in it.

Ants
Grasshopper
Bee
Rose
Flower
creative

Thanks in advance...
Avi
06/16/2005 10:04:19 AM · #2
Canon EF 100mm 2.8 Macro...... I love it
 06/16/2005 10:04:42 AM · #3
Sigma makes a decent 105 mm macro for Canon. I have the nikon version and it works pretty well. All of these pics were shot with that lens.



One minor complaint is that the autofocus is a bit slow and tends to wander quite a bit, but it's pretty sharp and a good value.
 06/16/2005 10:10:08 AM · #4
Originally posted by chiqui74:
Canon EF 100mm 2.8 Macro...... I love it

Have to second that; it's a lovely lens and you can get it from 7dayshop
for £340.

(can't comment on the autofocus because it lives in manual mode!)
 06/16/2005 10:13:15 AM · #5
Personally, I use the Sigma 105 f/2.8. It is about $100 cheaper than the Canon version... and basically you pay 100 dollars for the USM focusing (the sigma's focusing can be sluggish at times)
These were both taken with the Sigma 105.


You may want to also check out Jacko's Portfolio. He uses the EOS system with the Sigma 105 as well.

Lee
 06/16/2005 10:17:58 AM · #6
I've got the Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro lens for my 20D, and it takes great shots. OK, it's not as long as 100/105mm, but it was cheaper, and still did 1:1 shots (but you have to get the cam closer). As with the Sigma 105mm, the 50mm really needs to be used in MF when shooting macros, since it hunts something chronic in AF so close in, but it's probably easiest to stick to MF anyway :o) With great optics, and a good price, I'd recommend the Sigma lenses any day.

EDIT: oh, and here's a coupla sample shots from the 50mm macro:



Message edited by author 2005-06-16 10:20:26.
 06/16/2005 10:20:19 AM · #7
Thanks guys for the sugessions and for sharing the results. I think I will first look in to the Cannon then Sigma. With my current Quantray lens the Macro works between 200 and 300 mm. Also as said by Tranquil the lens is very sluggish. In Manual mode it is very hard to achieve a focus lock in medium or low light conditions.

Any more sugessions are welcome.
 06/16/2005 10:20:32 AM · #8
i use the 105 sigma as well. my favorite lens. i dont mind the AF being sluggish because i never use it, using the manual focus is extremely easy.
i took these with the sigma:

06/16/2005 10:23:54 AM · #9
The Tamron 90mm could be another option. A friend of mine uses that one on his Pentax *istD.
 06/16/2005 10:30:58 AM · #10
Originally posted by Manic:
I've got the Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro lens for my 20D, and it takes great shots. OK, it's not as long as 100/105mm, but it was cheaper, and still did 1:1 shots (but you have to get the cam closer). As with the Sigma 105mm, the 50mm really needs to be used in MF when shooting macros, since it hunts something chronic in AF so close in, but it's probably easiest to stick to MF anyway :o) With great optics, and a good price, I'd recommend the Sigma lenses any day.


Hi Manic!!
Can you provide some sugessions to the place I should look at and price bracket for the Sigma lenses... both 50 and 100 mm. You probably would be best to recommend this with your massive collection of cameras. :-)

Avi

Message edited by Manic - quote fixing.
 06/16/2005 10:31:57 AM · #11
When it comes to focal length the main thing that you need to consider is what you will be shooting and how much light will be available to you. The advantage of longer focal lengths is you will be able to be successful when photographing little critters that are hard to get extemely close to. The same idea goes for some flower photography if you need to get into some hard to reach areas. The second advantage is that the farther you are from the subject, then the more light that is allowed to pass in between the lens and your subject. Therefor, if light is limited, a longer focal length may be advantageous.

Just my thoughts.
 06/16/2005 10:32:32 AM · #12
I bought the Tamron 180mm macro. While at times focus is a little sluggish - it really works well. When I add the extension tubes I can get really close with a lot of detail. I had a 105mm macro lens (I can't remember the brand - Sigma or something like that) , but I found that the 180mm worked a lot better for my purposes. Canon makes a 180mm also. I also found on my 105 mm that if I had the protective skylight filter on it that my pictures did not come out sharp.
 06/16/2005 10:32:58 AM · #13
canon 180 3.5 macro is the best :)
 06/16/2005 10:37:47 AM · #14
Originally posted by asitv:
Can you provide some sugessions to the place I should look at and price bracket for the Sigma lenses... both 50 and 100 mm. You probably would be best to recommend this with your massive collection of cameras. :-)

Hehe, sure thing... and FYI, most of my cameras are plastic 35mm toys, not *real* cameras ;o)

Typical online prices:
Sigma 50mm Macro £190-200
Sigma 105mm Macro £270-300

www.microglobe.co.uk was where I got my 50mm from, I think, and they've got good prices for both lenses, but as always, shop around :o)
 06/16/2005 10:39:39 AM · #15
Oh, and Sigma also makes a 180mm F3.5 Macro, which might be worth considering if you've got £400 to spend ;o)
 06/16/2005 11:42:39 AM · #16
I really like the Sigma 105mm 2.8 and the price was right.

I haven't taken any bug shots since I can't seem to find one to pose for less than $40 an hour but I've taken a wide range images to see where the lens will stretch. Sharp as a tack and good for portraits.

Edit:Many of my Sigma images that are in my portfolio were taken from too great a distance and handheld. So the sharp as a tack comment might not show through on those particular shots.

Message edited by author 2005-06-16 11:45:43.
 06/16/2005 11:47:33 AM · #17
I am keeping my eyes open for a macro lense also... after reading the reviews at www.fredmiranda.com and doing a bit of other research, I am 95% sure that I will pick up the Sigma 105mm macro. It goes for around $350 in the States.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/17/2025 05:40:20 PM

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: 09/17/2025 05:40:20 PM EDT.