Getting serious about a macro lens... some questions

Boz Mon · Jul 10, 2008

I think I am ready to buy another lens, and it seems like macro would be the best choice for me. I dont want to spend $500 on a lens. I found a 24-50mm f3.3-4.5 macro for around $150. Is that lens worth anything, is it decent? Also, whats the difference between macro and micro? Is there a switch on the lens to change it from regular to macro? Any other tips?

dEARlEADER · Jul 10, 2008

nikon = micro

canon = macro

IMO if your are goind macro don't screw around.... spend $300 on a used sigma105 f2.8 or the Tamron 90mm

davebmck · Jul 10, 2008

You will be very disappointed in your macro shots if they are not sharp. You will not get this with a cheap lens. The Canon 100 f2.8 or the Sigma 105 f2.8 are well rated lenses and both can be bought new for just under $500.

kundalini · Jul 10, 2008

From my research so far, you are unlikely to get "good" results with that non-disclosed named lens, $150 ain't gonna get you much other than a $150 lens.

Check out members photos like doenoe and TCImages. There are more as well, but I would bet a dollar to a doughnut that their lenses well exceeded $150.

Just my 2¢.

tirediron · Jul 10, 2008

You could spend $25-50 on a set of close-up lenses (essentially convex filters which attach to the front of your lens in the same manner as a filter). The quality isn't great, but they will get you into macro/micro work for a minimal investment, and if you do 'get into it' then it's not too much to spend and still go out and get a real macro lens.

Samriel · Jul 11, 2008

dEARlEADER said:
IMO if your are goind macro don't screw around.... spend $300 on a used sigma105 f2.8 or the Tamron 90mm

You get also get a new Tokina 100mm f2.8 for ~USD330. All of these three lenses seem to be very good (I've only played with the Tokina and Sigma models though), and which ever one you take, you will not make a mistake.

Boz Mon · Jul 11, 2008

ok, so do I want a zoom macro, or a prime?

dEARlEADER · Jul 11, 2008

Boz Mon said:
ok, so do I want a zoom macro, or a prime?

the title of the thread suggest getting serious....

and for this it is generally accepted that prime would be your pony....

davebmck · Jul 11, 2008

I've never seen a decent macro that was not a prime.

Joves · Jul 11, 2008

1) Prime
2) Prime
3) See one and, two.
Number one always but, if not go for number two, if you cant use two then by all means number three.

icassell · Jul 11, 2008

Here's another option -- closer to your price range

http://www.amazon.com/Kenko-Auto-Ex...1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1215806421&sr=8-1

skiboarder72 · Jul 11, 2008

make sure you get at least 100mm, otherwise you will be blocking the light on your subject a lot of times because you will to be so close to get into macro ranges

Boz Mon · Jul 13, 2008

I have a zoom lens for my pentax ME-Super that has macro ability. The lens is vivitar (I think) 80-200 @f/4.5. Is there anything like this for my D40 or do I want something different?

Battou · Jul 13, 2008

Boz Mon said:
ok, so do I want a zoom macro, or a prime?

Prime all the way, I shot a Zoom macro once......and that was about all I could stand of it.

Overread · Jul 14, 2008

Agreed with the prime comments - most zoom macros are not true macro lenses - they get close, but not the bitingly close shots that a true macro will get.
I am guessing that you are using canon as you started asking for macro, so the canon 100mm macro is a workhorse macro lens for many a photographer. The only other macro above 100mm in the canon line is the 180mm - which is L quality, but considered by many to simply be too much in cost - especially when sigma make a 180mm macro which is very good.
One advantage of macro prime lenses is that the 3rd party lens producers can make top range lenses that are on par with the 1st party products (be they nikon or canon or any other) so do check out sigma and tamron as well