Macro lens

[Apexeye]

Hello, I have Cannon kiss x9i, It comes with two lenses,
1) 18-55 mm
2)55- 250mm

The first lens doesn't fulfil my hunger for capturing macro objects.
I want to buy a macro lens of Tamron or sigma, Please guide me.


キヤノン：EOS Kiss X9i｜概要

 

[petrochemist]

If you add an extension tube behind your 18-55 you should get macro magnifications readily enough. Another alternative is a diopter (the Raynox DCR150 is good) in front of the 55-250.
Either approach should be cheaper than a macro lens and the items used will also work with a macro lens if you end up getting one of those as well.

There are many other alternatives all nicely explained at www.extreme-macro.co.uk

 

[daveo228i]

Macro (micro Nikon) is a specialized type of photography. It requires a camera body, macro lens(es), dedicated ring flash, tripod, cable release. This is the bare minimum in equipment required to do it right. Knee pads are a +.

 

[weepete]

Extension tubes will probably work better on the 55-250mm as the close focusing distance on the 18-55mm is around 10 inches, I think other than the thinnest tube you'll put the focusing point behind the sensor.

The Canon 100mm f2.8 L macro is the one I'd go for, a stunningly sharp lens that can be used for more than just macro shots. Canon U.S.A., Inc. | EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM

The Sigma 105mm Macro is also well thought of and
is as sharp as the Canon
105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro | Sigma Corporation of America

Canon do a MP-E 65mm Macro, which is a fantastic lens, but it's a specialist macro that I wouldn't reccomend unless you have experience and a dual flash setup Canon U.S.A., Inc. | MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro Photo

Canon also do a non L series macro which is also meant to be quite good Canon U.S.A., Inc. | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

 

[petrochemist]

Extension tubes will probably work better on the 55-250mm as the close focusing distance on the 18-55mm is around 10 inches, I think other than the thinnest tube you'll put the focusing point behind the sensor.

It seems you don't know the physics of how extension tubes work.
With infinite extension the point of focus will be one focal length in front of the lenses entrance pupil. With retrofocus lenses the entrance pupil is often within the lens but I don't think there are any designs that put it behind the lens.
Adding 55mm extension to the 18-55 at it's longest zoom will give 1:1, with the lens focused at infinity and with a revised focus distance 110mm in front of the entrance pupil.
I think the shortest section of any of my sets of extension tubes will fail to give 1:1 even at the 18mm end of the zoom, but with the focusing movement of the lens it might just manage with the SLR models. My mirrorless tubes only have 10mm for their shortest tube, while I think the SLR models are all longer than this.

FWIW you can only get a focusing point behind the sensor using a curved mirror.

 

[weepete]

It seems you don't know the physics of how extension tubes work.
With infinite extension the point of focus will be one focal length in front of the lenses entrance pupil. With retrofocus lenses the entrance pupil is often within the lens but I don't think there are any designs that put it behind the lens.
Adding 55mm extension to the 18-55 at it's longest zoom will give 1:1, with the lens focused at infinity and with a revised focus distance 110mm in front of the entrance pupil.
I think the shortest section of any of my sets of extension tubes will fail to give 1:1 even at the 18mm end of the zoom, but with the focusing movement of the lens it might just manage with the SLR models. My mirrorless tubes only have 10mm for their shortest tube, while I think the SLR models are all longer than this.

FWIW you can only get a focusing point behind the sensor using a curved mirror.

Point taken, in my defence I have man-flu so as my daughter would say "I can't brain today...I have the dumb!".

For whatever reason I can't get my 17-70mm will only just focus with the 2nd thinnest (which I think is 16mm) but that's very, very close with the lens 2mm or so away from the subject so is totally impractical for most real world applications. My 18-55mm was the same, where the tubes worked fine with my 50mm prime and larger zooms (but those lenses have a much larger MFD).

 

[petrochemist]

For whatever reason I can't get my 17-70mm will only just focus with the 2nd thinnest (which I think is 16mm) but that's very, very close with the lens 2mm or so away from the subject so is totally impractical for most real world applications. My 18-55mm was the same, where the tubes worked fine with my 50mm prime and larger zooms (but those lenses have a much larger MFD).

Sorry to hear you're not well.
It sounds like your only using the lens at MFD, try it with the lens at infinity instead (once you recover). It should be more practical though working distance still won't be big.

 

[weepete]

For whatever reason I can't get my 17-70mm will only just focus with the 2nd thinnest (which I think is 16mm) but that's very, very close with the lens 2mm or so away from the subject so is totally impractical for most real world applications. My 18-55mm was the same, where the tubes worked fine with my 50mm prime and larger zooms (but those lenses have a much larger MFD).

Sorry to hear you're not well.
It sounds like your only using the lens at MFD, try it with the lens at infinity instead (once you recover). It should be more practical though working distance still won't be big.

No worres mate, I've actually got them in front of me just now and I'm using the focus at infinity, the lens won't focus as all at the minimum which is 0.22m with the middle tube on, it only just focuses at infinity but really close to the front element.

 

[Original katomi]

I don’t know the how or why but if I use to much extension tube/ring on a short lens sub 50mm I find that I end up looking inside of the lens

 

[beagle100]

Extension tubes will probably work better on the 55-250mm as the close focusing distance on the 18-55mm is around 10 inches, I think other than the thinnest tube you'll put the focusing point behind the sensor.

The Canon 100mm f2.8 L macro is the one I'd go for, a stunningly sharp lens that can be used for more than just macro shots. Canon U.S.A., Inc. | EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM

The Sigma 105mm Macro is also well thought of and
is as sharp as the Canon
105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro | Sigma Corporation of America

Canon do a MP-E 65mm Macro, which is a fantastic lens, but it's a specialist macro that I wouldn't reccomend unless you have experience and a dual flash setup Canon U.S.A., Inc. | MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro Photo

Canon also do a non L series macro which is also meant to be quite good Canon U.S.A., Inc. | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

I'll second the Canon 100 2.8 macro recommendation (but non-L)
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless