Macro recommendations

[Optikal iLLusion]

Im a beginning photographer. Just picked up my first DSLR a few months ago (Canon T3). It came as a kit so i have the 18-55mm and the 75-300mm with it.

Im looking to buy a new lense, most likely a macro, because im wanting to do close up shots and some portrait stuff. Most of what i've read so far about macro supports those needs. I looked at the thread posted about about beginner stuff for EOS users so i know that Tokina, Sigma, and Tamron are the main aftermarket suppliers.

I guess what im wondering is what do you guys recommend out of the 3? Im fine with a prime lens as a side note .

Thanks

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by Optikal iLLusion

Im fine with a prime lens as a side note .

Thats good: All proper macro lenses are primes. You'll find some zooms (particularly from those three manufacturers) that claim "macro", but they generally only get 1:3 ratio (whereas real macro is 1:1) and their performance is sub-par at best.

If you're looking for a macro, I'd actually suggest Canon's own EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro.

[Optikal iLLusion]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Thats good: All proper macro lenses are primes. You'll find some zooms (particularly from those three manufacturers) that claim "macro", but they generally only get 1:3 ratio (whereas real macro is 1:1) and their performance is sub-par at best.

If you're looking for a macro, I'd actually suggest Canon's own EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro.

Where can i find the ratio of the lens that you're talking about?? I checked the Specs on some of the Canon Macros last night and couldn't find where it specified.

Would you mind explaining what that ratio is referring to?

[OsmosisStudios]

The ratios I mentioned are the reproduction ratio of the lens. So, at 1:3, the lens projects the subject onto the sensor at 1/3 life size. At 1:2, it would be half life size. A proper macro lens projects the image onto the sensor at life-size. So, if you imagine your sensor as being an 18x24mm rectangle: if you have a coin that is 10mm, it'll be 10mm in size in that rectangle. If you have coin that is, say, 25mm in diameter: it wont even fit into the rectangle, so your image would be of a very close-up short of a portion of the coin.

You *can* get lenses that get better than 1:1. Canon make a 65mm mp-e lens, that gets to 5:1, which is 5x larger than life size.

[Optikal iLLusion]

Perfect. Thanks again. I'll so some more looking around i suppose. Now... one more thing that just came to mind. Is it only that ratio that separates the 60mm lens you suggested vs something like the Canon 50mm with the f1.8?

[ceremus]

Originally Posted by Optikal iLLusion

Perfect. Thanks again. I'll so some more looking around i suppose. Now... one more thing that just came to mind. Is it only that ratio that separates the 60mm lens you suggested vs something like the Canon 50mm with the f1.8?

Aside from being slightly longer, the major difference is that the 60mm macro is an f/2.8 while the 50mm is f/1.8 (larger maximum aperture / faster lens / gathers more light).

If you have a 50mm already I'd actually suggest the 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro.
From a recent conversation,

Originally Posted by ceremus

...
If you have interest in doing insects though I would go for the 100mm. To get maximum magnification on the 60mm, the minimum focus distance is about eight inches, where on the 100mm the MFD is 1ft, so you're less likely to frighten your subject off. The 100mm also doubles as a nice portrait lens, given a relatively wide aperture, nice sharpness, and that longer lenses tend to be more flattering for portraiture. The 60mm could be more versatile for casual snapshots and group photos, being a relatively fast prime it has some overlap with the 50mm prime lenses used for those purposes. Many Canon users already have either the 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 (usually the f/1.8 as it's so inexpensive) so it would be somewhat redundant to include the 60mm macro in the same kit.

[WolfHeart704]

I recently wanted to get a macro lens as my interest in macro photography grew. I looked into
Canon lenses as well as off-brand names.(Tokina, Sigma, Tamron, etc.) After I did some research I decided to go get some advice from my local camera store and check out some of the lenses I had in mind. I looked at the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM, the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM, and the Tamron SP 60mm f/2. The lady that helped me said that if I wanted
a more versatile lens, to go with either of the 60mm lenses, because it makes an excellent portrait lenses, too. But, the 100mm will allow me to be farther away from bugs but still get the same close up shot. With the 60mm you are literally on top of them and not all will stay there. In the end, I decided to get the Tamron, one being because I wanted that extra versatility, two it is slightly faster and three it had a $100 mail in rebate. After testing it out and playing around with it I really like it, at times the auto-focus will search a bit but I use manual a lot, too. I will probably save up for the 100mmL or 180mmL eventually because I have had times where I didn't get the shot because my subject flew away on me. So, if you already have a lens that takes good portraits and you intend on taking pictures of bugs and other creatures that don't allow you to get close, I would go with the 100mm from Canon.

[ishootRAW]

Originally Posted by WolfHeart704

I would go with the 100mm from Canon.

+1
Its one of the sharpest lenses they make.

Ten Chars Crap

[Optikal iLLusion]

Since i have neither the 50mm or 60mm lenses would it be a more logical choice then, to choose the 60mm because of the overlap it has with the 50mm? I am also interested in taking snapshots of people as well like i said before.

[mbrobich]

Tamron 60mm F2 works wonders for portrait on my Nikon D7000 and also does macro to boot !! Do they make one for Canon mount ?