Options
macro lens suggestion?
ToTaLKaRNaGe
Registered Users Posts: 21 Big grins
Not sure this is the right forum but ill post it here anyway lol. I have Been using my Pentax k-x since christmas. I have seen some incredibly close up macro shots people have taken of insects and water droplets that you can see your relection in. With my nikon d70 i had a 28-80 sigma macro lens which did awesome but nowhere near as close a magnification as i see with most of the macro pictures posted by other photographers. So my question is what am i looking for in a macro lens in order to get as close as possible to get such a close shot?
0
Comments
Sigma AF 105mm f/2.8 EX macro DG
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/301-sigma-af-105mm-f28-ex-macro-dg-lab-test-report--review
Tokina AF 100mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro D macro
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/270-tokina-af-100mm-f28-at-x-pro-d-macro-canon-review--test-report
Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP macro
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/282-tamron-af-90mm-f28-di-sp-macro-test-report--review
I wound up purchasing an older version of the Tamron 90mm for myself and I'm pretty happy with it.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
thanks ziggy you seem to always answer my questions.
I also use the older model Tamron 90mm f/2.8 AF SP Macro. This is not the Di version which in Tamrons alphabet soup nomenclature indicates that the lens is "optimized for digital". I don't really know how my Tammy could be any sharper because it rivals my 70-200mm f/4L IS and 24-70mm f/2.8L lenses in image quality. NOTE: this is NOT the Tamron 90mm f/2.5 Adapt-All lens.
I would look for a lens which can focus down to a 1:1 image ratio without adapters. Almost all macro lenses produce very-good to excellent image quality however, some of the macro lenses only focus down to a 1:2 image ratio without adding an adapter (55mm f/2.5 Canon is one).
I would select a lens of about 90-105mm focal length. This is a great compromise between lens to subject distance (important for lighting and when shooting little creepy-crawlies) and weight. IMO, the 50-60mm lenses do not give enough lens to subject distance and the 150-180mm lenses, while providing plenty of distance, are fairly heavy and expensive.
I have the Canon-mount version of the Tokina 100mm macro. By Canon standards, its AF is rather slow, and in low light, prone to hunt. But when it can get a lock, it's accurate. The AF speed might bother me more if it weren't for the fact that most of my macro shots are taken with manual focus. I suspect this would be the case with any macro lens no matter how good its AF was.
Got bored with digital and went back to film.