A good macro lens?

[Phil2k]

By the way, yes I do shoot full manual and have a good basic understanding of aperture, shutter speed and ISO.

 

[unpopular]

My suggestion is clunky, and isn't necessarily good for things that move, but is an option to achieve very high quality results for less than $100. If you can deal with manual aperture and stop down metering, it might be a good option to get your feet wet.

A 75mm enlarging lens might be a little more manageable.

 

[Dao]

As far as optical quality goes, most of the true macro lens are good. I do not think you can tell the different if an experience macro shooter take a photo with Canon, Nikon, Tokina, Tamron nor Sigma lens when the focal length are about the same.

For insect type shots, I prefer longer focal length. I have a older generation non-USM Canon 100mm macro, sometimes I think 100mm is a little short. I think the main difference between the Canon 100mm macro vs Tokina, Tamron and Sigma (an my old Canon as well) is the internal focus. So the Canon lens will not extent when focusing. Especially if you are taking a photo at 1:1 ratio, the old Canon, Tokina, Sigma and Tamron will extent out so that the lens is physically longer.

Of course, the Canon USM and the Canon L can focus faster. But I seldom use AF when I shoot insects. so it doesn't matter.

To sum up, the extra money goes to

- Canon branded lens (do not need to worry about compatibility for future Canon cameras)
- Internal focus
- IS (the L version) or OS in Sigma
- Build quality (Note: some of the newer Sigma macro lenses are not bad)
- Longer focal length

As far a optical performance, I am not too worry about it.

 

[EDL]

MP-E65 FTW!

 

[unpopular]

^^ isn't it within the OP's budget, used?

 

[sovietdoc]

OP, if you can't get a 100m f/2.8L macro, which is a stunning lens (either new or used), try 100mm f/2.8 non L, it's almost as good and within the budget. But for you I'd probably suggest 100mm macro as your better option.

 

[480sparky]

So then there would be a difference between magnification and reproduction ratio then?

Saying 1:1 is not the same as 1x?

Magnification and reproduction ratio mean the same thing, they're just different expressions of the same principle..... the size of the projected image on the film/sensor in relationship to it's actual size.

1:1 rr = 1x mag.

2:1 rr = 2x mag.

1:2 rr = 0.5 mag.


But sensor / film size doesn't enter into it. A 10mm object, projected onto the film / sensor at 10mm, is still a 1:1 (or 1x), whether it's a cell phone camera or an 8x10 view camera.

 

[jake337]

So then there would be a difference between magnification and reproduction ratio then?

Saying 1:1 is not the same as 1x?

Magnification and reproduction ratio mean the same thing, they're just different expressions of the same principle..... the size of the projected image on the film/sensor in relationship to it's actual size.

1:1 rr = 1x mag.

2:1 rr = 2x mag.

1:2 rr = 0.5 mag.


But sensor / film size doesn't enter into it. A 10mm object, projected onto the film / sensor at 10mm, is still a 1:1 (or 1x), whether it's a cell phone camera or an 8x10 view camera.

Yup, your sensor size will only determine how much of the 10mm object you will actually be able to photograph. An example would be trying to shoot a quarter at 1:1 with an sensor/film smaller than 35mm versus a 35mm+ sized sensor/film.

That's why a I like large format portraits so much. A 8x10 piece of film is almost large enough to shoot someones facial portrait at 1:1.

 

[cgipson1]

^^ isn't it within the OP's budget, used?

Also.. NOT good to learn macro on! lol!

 

[unpopular]

Yeah. I was confused. As with normal lenses, only field of view is affected, not magnification.

 

[cgipson1]

Yeah. I was confused. As with normal lenses, only field of view is affected, not magnification.

Too many mushrooms? lol!

 

[unpopular]

LOL. Macro+Mushrooms? That would be awesome.

 

[TheBiles]

Another vote for the 100L macro! It may be my favorite lens in my bag. You get IS, weather sealing, macro capability, a fast 2.8 aperture, and great portrait ability with it!

Sent from my Galaxy S III

 

[HughGuessWho]

Just curious. Why all of the suggestions for the Canon 100mm L Macro, when it is the same price as the MP-E 65. Isnt that the premier macro lens?

 

[Dao]

Just curious. Why all of the suggestions for the Canon 100mm L Macro, when it is the same price as the MP-E 65. Isnt that the premier macro lens?

I believe it depends on the type of macro shots a person want to do and if he/she want to use the macro lens for other stuff as well. I think the regular macro lens is more practical.