Need a cheap Macro lens. Under $100

[sj022698]

Title pretty much says it all. Doesn't have to be the best but just something to learn with. I'm not spending more. I have a canon EOS Rebel.

Would love all suggestions. I have a Canon 55-200 mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM EF Lens
that I thought about selling or trading to get a new macro



Thanks!

 

[soylentgreen]

Look at the EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro. It's around $200 though. Only true macro lens I can think of in that price range. You can also try close-up filters or extension tubes in the meantime if you do not have the cash for a new lens. Really depends on the image quality you want and how close you want to zoom in.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

$100?

good luck, because pretty much any actual lens isn't gonna happen at that kind of a price, that's basicly the EF 50mm f/1.8 (which is actually damn good for $75) and the 18-55 kit (which is still over $100)

 

[sj022698]

I have the 18-55. I can't get close enough. What about a used tamron or sigma? What "mm" should I look for in true Macro lens?

 

[usayit]

reversal ring?

 

[sabbath999]

I am thinking 50mm 1.8 and extension tube? That is about all I can think of for $100 that will give any kind of quality at all

 

[TheOtherBob]

You know, I used to do pretty good macro shots with the 50mm 1.8 (now use the 100mm 2.8). The nifty fifty isn't actually all that bad at it -- it's not as close-focusing as it really needs to be to be "macro," but I got some great close flower shots. That might be one (or even the only) way to go for $100. Depending on your use, maybe it won't work for you -- but I was happy with it.

 

[sj022698]

Well, I basically can get to the glass and it's 30" deep. What about $200 ??? I need to get pretty close.

 

[WolfSpring]

shoot through a magnifying glass? J/K I don't know about canon, but a friend and I were looking at macro's for Nikon and all the good ones are upwards of 350+.

 

[JerryPH]

The reversal ring and extention tubes both will get you there. As for the quality, well... you get what you pay for.

 

[sabbath999]

Well, if you are talking $200 that is a whole different kettle of fish, and I have a lens that will answer (within its obvious limitations)

Check out the Tamron 70-300 LD DI II (clicky)

What it is:

Sharp
Light
Inexpensive (in the $100-169 range generally, depending on new or used)
A really excellent telephoto for the money, longer than what you already have
Sharp
Macro 1:2 that actually works very well (keeping in mind it is a 1:2 macro on a cheap telephoto, and not an actual macro lens)
Sharp (although I may have mentioned that before)

What it is not:

Fast (it is, indeed, quite slow)
Fancy
Metal
Quick to autofocus

I have this lens, and have shot 10,000+ pictures with it. Is it the best lens out there? HEAVENS NO. Is it the best $150ish 70-300 zoom with a 1:2 macro that I have seen? Absolutely without a doubt.

It also has the advantage of adding 100mm to the end of the range of lenses you already own, and I can absolutely recommend one without any hesitation.

 

[TCimages]

extension tubes will work well with your lens. And since there is nothing but air in extension tubes, the quality of your lens will remain the same. When I used them, I had Kenkos. They allowed connections for the aperture and focus. I never use mine anymore since I bought dedicated macro lens.

 

[Helen B]

Can you use bellows on a Rebel? If so, an enlarging lens will work well. BPM bellows are cheap and very versatile, but I have no idea how difficult it is to get Canon adapters. You could probably use a body cap. A set of BPM bellows and an 80 mm or 105 mm EL-Nikkor should cost you around $100 or less, I think. Enlarging lenses are designed for close-up work, and they will perform better than your 55-200, which is not designed for close-up work.

If you had to buy new adaptors you would go over budget - they are about $26 for a bayonet mount and $20 for a threaded mount.

BPM bellows were used on the Bowens Illumitran. There is an Illumitran complete with BPM bellows on eBay for a Buy-It-Now of $35. That has two lens mounts, one of which could be an M39 enlarging lens mount (they were common).

A 105 mm EL-Nikkor will cost about $40 to $50 on eBay. Excellent enlarging lenses are very cheap right now. For greater than life size, you would reverse the enlarging lens. You can get those BPM adapters for $20.

There is a $75 high quality macro kit, with only the Canon mount missing. You could probably attach a body cap to the existing mount on the bellows - but I have no idea whether or not a Rebel will work with that combination (I know my D40x will, but that doesn't help you).

For greater than life size if you had bellows you could then use a cine lens like a Switar 12.5 mm or 25 mm reversed - these are similar in quality to very expensive Photars and Luminars at a fraction of the cost (ie $25).

Best,
Helen

 

[sabbath999]

Here are a couple of shots... one is me shooting the bug with the Tamron I mentioned above (and sheese, I look FAT in the picture... I am not that fat) taken by my wife with the much derided (around TPF, not my house) 18-200 VR... the other is one of the dragonflies I was shooting... not sure if it is the exact one, but it was one of the ones in the waterplants.

I actually had my 105 VR f/2.8 with me at the time on my D40, but I was using the Tamron because it has a lot greater reach and those dragonflies were REALLY working during the middle of the day (Tulsa, OK Zoo in September), so they were flying all about... and I couldn't get close. Besides, leaning out any more might have caused me to go swimming, not my first choice with a couple of grand worth of unprotected camera equipment.

Anyway, here are the shots.

EXIF: 1/1000s f/5.6 ISO400 300mm (35mm eq:450mm)

No, the dragonfly isn't perfect, I didn't have enough depth of field, but I had to keep my shutter speed up because they were not still. I don't claim this is a great picture, I was just wanting to show you that even at 1:2 the macro can be usable... these particular dragonflies were about 3 inches long.

The lens was wide open when I shot this... in retrospect, I could have knocked down the SS to about 500 and closed up the lens to about F/8 for better effect. Ah well, live and learn.

 

[Skyhawk]

I have the 18-55. I can't get close enough. What about a used tamron or sigma? What "mm" should I look for in true Macro lens?

I have a 50mm and 100mm true macro lens. I probably use the 50mm far more than I do the 100mm.

But even at today's prices for old-fashioned manual focus Rokkor (Minolta) lenses, both of these lenses routinely sell on Ebay for well over $250.00 each.

You may have your (search) work cut out for you.

Jeff