Macro Lens Recommendation Needed
I have been using digital cameras for about two years, semi seriously for the last year. I am ready to graduate from point and shoot (Fuji MX1200 to Canon SD100 to Canon s1 IS) to a dslr.
I have pretty much decided on the Canon Rebel XT, but dream of an EOS. Either cameras are probably better than I am!
The question is lenses. Most seem to say that you will ditch any of the kit lenses eventually for new ones. Back in my film days, I used a Minolta with a Vivitar 90mm f2.5 macro as my major lens. Loved the portraits it gave and could go to macro in an instant.
Any idea of the digital equivelent? It seems I liked close up or a slight telephoto, never did anything with the then standard 55 mm lens.
Z
I have pretty much decided on the Canon Rebel XT, but dream of an EOS. Either cameras are probably better than I am!
The question is lenses. Most seem to say that you will ditch any of the kit lenses eventually for new ones. Back in my film days, I used a Minolta with a Vivitar 90mm f2.5 macro as my major lens. Loved the portraits it gave and could go to macro in an instant.
Any idea of the digital equivelent? It seems I liked close up or a slight telephoto, never did anything with the then standard 55 mm lens.
Z
It is the purpose of life that each of us strives to become actually what he is potentially. We should be obsessed with stretching towards that goal through the world we inhabit.
0
Comments
Welcome to dgrin, Zanotti. I once owned a Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5 macro also on an OM-1 and I loved mine too - but that was 25 years ago.
Today there are basically three length macro lens styles available. The 50-60mm macros, 90-100mm macros, a 150mm macro from Sigma, and the 180mm macros. All have there advantages and disadvantages.
The shorter focal length macros - 50-60mm- tend to be cheaper, have slightly more depth of field ( since they are shorter focal lengths ), and are better for flat immobile subjects such as stamps or coins. This is not an absolute truth but a generally true statement.
The 100mm focal lengths are VERY sharp and less expensive than the 180mm lenses. They are a litttle long for portraits on a DSLR with a 1.6 mag ratio like the Canon Rebel XT. The Canon 100 and the Tamron 90 are both very highly regarded.
The 180mm lenses give a significantly longer distance from the subject and a significantly shallower depth of field. The increased distance can be very helpful when shooting insects or butterflies or hummingbirds. And the shallow depth of field can be very attractive but also require a smaller choice of aperature. These lenses tend to be more expensive than the shorter focal length lenses and tend to be favored by shooters with bigger budgets.
Sigma makes a very nice 150mm f2.8 HSM macro that I like quite a bit. It is cheaper than the Canon 100mm f2.8 and is light and very easy to handle.
So it really comes down to your budget constraints and desired focal length. You cannot tell the focal length used by looking at the images usually. I use a Canon 100 f2.8, a Tamron 180 f3.5 and a Sigma 150 f2.8 and I like them all. If I were to purchase a 180 macro again, I might consider the Canon due to its higher speed focus motor. But the cost is significantly more. Depends on your desires and needs again.
If you only want to explore close ups, a cheaper way is using extension tubes or + lenses screwed into the front filter threads on a standard lens, like the Canon 250D or 500D, or the Nikon 3T,4T or 5T. These threaded adapters can be used on any standard lenses - they are not dedicated to any particular manufacturers lenses. You CAN use a Canon 500D on a Minolta 100mm lens IF the thread diameters match. The 500D comes in several thread diameters 58, 72, 77mm I believe as these are common Canon lens thread diameters.
Lighting also plays a strong part in good macro images - consider using some sort of flash with some sort of diffuser. And check out Gilles Martin's "Macrophotography - Learning from a Master" You can find it on Amazon. A great book written, just like it says, by a master!
If you google macro lenses there are several threads here on dgrin about macros lenses and shooting as well.
Here are a few links to get you started
http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=3131&highlight=macro+lenses
http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=6299&highlight=macro+Andy
Read'em and enjoy. Then show us some of your shots with your new lens!
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Way cool that my idea of a good lens matches! Yes, I bought the Vivitar 90mm macro in 1980, just after getting out of school. I still have it and if pressed to do some really good photography, I would not hesitate to get it out again!
I will look into your recommendations. I also have started reading the threads - really good stuff - but want to take my time and enjoy/study them.
Sources of the lenses? Every thread seems to lead to B&H Photo as most reliable. I would love to buy locally - Cleveland - but find prices ( and taxes) are relatively high. I like / dont mind to pay for service, but now rarely get it from brick and morter stores.
Thanks again,
Z
The 100mm focal lengths are VERY sharp and less expensive than the 180mm lenses. They are a litttle long for portraits on a DSLR with a 1.6 mag ratio like the Canon Rebel XT
OK, shoot me for being a newbie, but please explain the 1.6 mag ratio. I assume this is the difference between the captured area in film and digital, but dont understand if this is all cameras, this lens, or this body.
Could I get a primer on "mag ratio"
Thanks,
Z
I just press the button and the camera goes CLICK. :dunno
Canon: gripped 20d and 30d, 10-22 3.5-4.5, 17-55 IS, 50mm f1.8, 70-200L IS, 85mm f1.8, 420ex
sigma: 10-20 4-5.6 (for sale), 24-70 2.8 (for sale), 120-300 2.8