best macro lens (1 Viewer)

[Pitta Patter]

I was thinking of getting a macro lens. I use canon, didn't want to spend too much. Low hundreds for new or second hand. Anyone have any suggestions? Ta Kevin

 

[Roy C]

The Canon 100mm L IS macro is superb but maybe above your budget. The Canon 100mm non IS macro is also very,very good but does not have the I.S. a used copy can be had for around 3 hundred maybe even less.

 

[Lightbender57]

Best macro

I've been involved in macro for over 40 years now. My suggestion follows Roy's... get your self anything in the 90-105 mm range, NON-IS if possible. IS is seldom, if ever, used for serious macro work, and NEVER used on a tripod.

Any of the modern lenses are sharp beyond your camera's ability to resolve, the only differences these days is price, mostly related to build quality like weatherproofing, etc.
In the mm range mentioned, I've used Canon, Sigma and Tamron. Canon's lens sticks out and is easily damaged, Sigma's is recessed and protected. Canon will make you pay extra for a lens hood (a necessity), one comes with the Sigma; however, newer Sigma's now include IS, which is an unnecessary expense. Tamron remains a good choice.

If you don't want to lug around a tripod,at least get a monopod and a small cheap ball head to put on it. Your image quality will thank you!

 

[Xmor]

I've been using a Tamron 90mm F 2.8 SP Di for a couple of years and I'm very pleased with it. No IS but as Lightbender says with macro it really is not essential. Should also come well with you budget.

 

[tjsimonsen]

I've been involved in macro for over 40 years now. My suggestion follows Roy's... get your self anything in the 90-105 mm range, NON-IS if possible. IS is seldom, if ever, used for serious macro work, and NEVER used on a tripod.

Any of the modern lenses are sharp beyond your camera's ability to resolve, the only differences these days is price, mostly related to build quality like weatherproofing, etc.
In the mm range mentioned, I've used Canon, Sigma and Tamron. Canon's lens sticks out and is easily damaged, Sigma's is recessed and protected. Canon will make you pay extra for a lens hood (a necessity), one comes with the Sigma; however, newer Sigma's now include IS, which is an unnecessary expense. Tamron remains a good choice.

If you don't want to lug around a tripod,at least get a monopod and a small cheap ball head to put on it. Your image quality will thank you!

I agree with much of what you say, but not with respect to a lens hood being necessary, or even useful, on a Canon lens - it gets in the way of the (often necessary) flash.

Thomas

 

[arlon]

I'm in the Nikon world but the best bang for the buck I can think of in a new lens is the Tokina 100mm F2.8. It's a really good lens (I shoot it on a nikon d800e that will bring out any flaw in a lens). Also makes a really good portrait lens.

 

[mark david]

I recently purchased the Canon 100mm usm macro.
It is a superb lens and very sharp.

It is not an L Lens and doesnt have IS which is not really effective anyway with real close focusing.

The 100mm usm is a bargain for what it costs and is one of Canons sharpest lenses despite its relatively low price tag.

I use my with Canon's tripod collar thingy although not really necessary as it is quite a light and compact lens.

Can certainly recommend it.

 

[holzphoto]

the sigma 105mm macro is an excellent lens. there are some older "Non DG" verisons that can be had cheap and despite not being "DG" will work w/ your camera fine.

i've never used the tamron mentioned, but have heard great things about it.

 

[holzphoto]

also you can find the non L/non IS canon 100mm macro for $300-$400 used. it is an excellent optic as well.