I'd like to buy a dedicated Macro lens to use on a Canon 10D camera. It's a gift for someone who may or may not get into macro photography. I've seen the price range for good lenses, and it's much higher than I'd want to spend. Don't laugh, but is it possible to get anything for around $200? The recipient has a lot of other lenses, so I don't want to get a lens with macro capabilities. I'd like to get a dedicated macro capable of extreme closeups. Thanks for your help!
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
"Low Cost" Dedicated Macro Lens
- Thread starter LCF350859
- Start date
digital_photog
Leading Member
The price range limits your selection to maybe a used Canon EF 100 macro! I would look at a new one from one of the internet sites. Try Hunts Photo or B&H many others out there.
Good Luck
Fred
Good Luck
Fred
M_Edge
Senior Member
Your price range makes things a little difficult.
If we (properly) define a ‘macro’ lens as one that will allow magnification up to 1:1 (image size = subject size), the cheapest you’ll find new is the Canon 50/2.8 at $269 from B&H. Yes, I know the Canon 50/2.5 is cheaper ($240), but it only goes to 1:2 without the ‘life-size adapter’, which costs about the same as it does ($230)! And yes, Vivitar and Phoenix also make macro lenses, but let’s not go there.
If your price is absolute, try for a used one at Fred Miranda (look it up on Google) or eBay. You might find the lens quoted for less by other dealers, but if you find one for $200 or less new, watch out! If a deal’s too good to be true, it’s probably not true!
There are some other ways to get to the macro range, cheaper than a dedicated lens. Someone’s already mentioned extension tubes – I’d suggest the Kenko 3-tube set ($169 from B&H), or the cheapest way would be a reversing ring. Do a Google search on this – the rings are cheap ($10? $15?), but you’ll need to know what lenses he has for the sizing.
There are several other ways to get macro shots, but by far the most convenient is an actual macro lens, such as the Canon 50/2.8.
--
BJCP National
If we (properly) define a ‘macro’ lens as one that will allow magnification up to 1:1 (image size = subject size), the cheapest you’ll find new is the Canon 50/2.8 at $269 from B&H. Yes, I know the Canon 50/2.5 is cheaper ($240), but it only goes to 1:2 without the ‘life-size adapter’, which costs about the same as it does ($230)! And yes, Vivitar and Phoenix also make macro lenses, but let’s not go there.
If your price is absolute, try for a used one at Fred Miranda (look it up on Google) or eBay. You might find the lens quoted for less by other dealers, but if you find one for $200 or less new, watch out! If a deal’s too good to be true, it’s probably not true!
There are some other ways to get to the macro range, cheaper than a dedicated lens. Someone’s already mentioned extension tubes – I’d suggest the Kenko 3-tube set ($169 from B&H), or the cheapest way would be a reversing ring. Do a Google search on this – the rings are cheap ($10? $15?), but you’ll need to know what lenses he has for the sizing.
There are several other ways to get macro shots, but by far the most convenient is an actual macro lens, such as the Canon 50/2.8.
--
BJCP National
Thanks for all your suggestions! My friend has a 50mm 1.8 fixed lens (as do I), but I don't think of that as being a macro. I use it as a regular lens. I saw the Kenko extenders (set of 3) on B&H's website. Will the extenders work better for extreme closeups of flowers, insects, etc.?
Surfincb
Leading Member
Look at the tokina lens! I have the 100 and I got it used from adorama for 229.00. Great great macro lens, especially for the price!
M_Edge
Senior Member
Better than what? And we’re getting to the nitty-gritty now.
What do you want to do? If you want to take 1:1 shots of small non-moving objects, using a tripod under very controlled conditions (NO WIND!), the 50/1.8 and the Kenko extension tubes will do an excellent job for you.
However, poking the lens at a bee from 20 mm away may make the bee a little skittish! Most macro photographers who like to do insects prefer the higher focal lengths, such as the 150 mm or 180 mm macros, as they allow you much more distance to the subject. But now we’re talking quite a bit more money! The Canon 180/3.5 L is $1,200, and the Sigma 180/3.5 is $800. Some go mid-range, for example to the Canon 100/2.8 ($440) or the Sigma 105/2.8 ($400), as a compromise between subject distance and cost.
You pays your money and you gets your choice.
--
BJCP National
What do you want to do? If you want to take 1:1 shots of small non-moving objects, using a tripod under very controlled conditions (NO WIND!), the 50/1.8 and the Kenko extension tubes will do an excellent job for you.
However, poking the lens at a bee from 20 mm away may make the bee a little skittish! Most macro photographers who like to do insects prefer the higher focal lengths, such as the 150 mm or 180 mm macros, as they allow you much more distance to the subject. But now we’re talking quite a bit more money! The Canon 180/3.5 L is $1,200, and the Sigma 180/3.5 is $800. Some go mid-range, for example to the Canon 100/2.8 ($440) or the Sigma 105/2.8 ($400), as a compromise between subject distance and cost.
You pays your money and you gets your choice.
--
BJCP National
I did a search for the Tokina (used). It looks like you got very lucky. It's not on the websites of the major NYC stores that list their used lenses. I'll make some calls in case they have some unadvertised merchandise. Otherwise, I guess I'll have to go with the extenders, unless someone feels strongly that they're not even worth buying.
Your response is disappointing, but not surprising. It makes sense. Do you think there's any advantage to using the extenders over the 50/1.8 under similar conditions? Also, how is the 50/1.8 used as a macro? Is it just that you can enlarge an image to such an extent that the details show up as if they were shot with a macro?
Mark Salvetti
Leading Member
If your friend has a 70-200 or a 100-400, then consider the Canon 500D closeup lens. It won't get you life-size, but it works very well with those two lenses. I've seen some great results with it. It costs $140 for the 77mm version.
If you're lucky, you might be able to find a used Canon non-USM 100mm macro for around $200 (I did). But usually they go for over $300 on FM.
Mark
If you're lucky, you might be able to find a used Canon non-USM 100mm macro for around $200 (I did). But usually they go for over $300 on FM.
Mark
Go to Kiev camera and get a manual focus M42 "Pentax" mount manual focus lens. There are several to choose from. I seem to remember, they have a tilt shift too...
There are other M42 lenses available from other vendors. Manual focus for macro isn't such a bad idea... I've done it and it's not bad, especially if it means saving $500 or more.
Good luck.
--
'In 1983, the game of golf had a firm grip on the waist of my boxers and was administering the death wedgie. I had a dose of the atomic yips and after missing 10 of 11 cuts by a single shot, I was ready to quit and apply for a job as a wringer-outer for a one-armed window cleaner.'
There are other M42 lenses available from other vendors. Manual focus for macro isn't such a bad idea... I've done it and it's not bad, especially if it means saving $500 or more.
Good luck.
--
'In 1983, the game of golf had a firm grip on the waist of my boxers and was administering the death wedgie. I had a dose of the atomic yips and after missing 10 of 11 cuts by a single shot, I was ready to quit and apply for a job as a wringer-outer for a one-armed window cleaner.'
- David Feherty
Jeff Peterman
Forum Pro
First, macro is defined as focusing close enough that the subject is about the same size on the film plane as it is in reality (1:1 magnification, or higher). That means that with a 50mm lens you have to be twice as close as with a 100mm lens to get the same size final image. If you are shooting dead objects (coins, dead insects, etc.), the 50mm macro lens will be fine. If you're shooting living subjects (live insects, etc.), you need to be far enough away not to disturb them, which means a 100mm macro lens or longer. At the shorter end, I recommend the Sigma 50mm macro, which sells for around $250. At the longer end, you have to go much higher than your budget for a decent lens. The other option is to use some means of focusing closer - close-up filters or extension tubes. Close-up filters screw in to the front of the lens, are easy to use, but decrease the quality of the lens that you use with them. Extension tubes don't impact lens quality (they are essentially empty tubes), and will work with any lens of the same mount (e.g., one for the Canon EOS mount on the 10D will work on any lens that fits the 10D).
Given your budget and the fact that your friend has several lenses, I recommend a set of Kenko extenion tubes. They will give maximum flexibility for the best price.
--
Jeff Peterman
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com
Given your budget and the fact that your friend has several lenses, I recommend a set of Kenko extenion tubes. They will give maximum flexibility for the best price.
--
Jeff Peterman
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com
Mark Salvetti
Leading Member
One problem with the extension tubes is you'll quickly lose multiple stops as you add length, especially with the 50mm lens. So manual focus can get pretty difficult.
There's more info here under "Lenses"
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/
Mark
There's more info here under "Lenses"
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/
Mark
M_Edge
Senior Member
Reset!
My comments assume you’ll be using the extender tubes WITH the 50/1.8. The Canon 50/1.8, without extension tubes, allows a maximum magnification of 1:6.66. The extender tubes by themselves are totally useless – they are used between the camera body and the lens to allow closer focusing. The effect is proportional to the focal length of the lens. The Kenko set comes with a set of 12, 20, and 36 mm tubes. If you use the 36 and 20 mm tubes on a 50 mm lens, you’ll get pretty close to 1:1 macro. You lose f-stops and the ability to focus at infinity. If you put the same extensions on a 200 mm lens, you’ll be able to focus closer than without the extenders, but not nearly as close as the lower focal length. If you happen to have a 28 mm lens around, this will allow you to focus even closer.
Warning – the focusing distance is a factor of the center-focus of the lens and the extension tube length. With low focal-length lenses it’s quite possible to add extenders until your maximum focus distance is inside the lens! This makes things a little trickey :> )
Do a google search on macro instruction – there are several good sites that explain the use of extension tubes, and other alternatives for getting macro images, much better than I can.
--
BJCP National
My comments assume you’ll be using the extender tubes WITH the 50/1.8. The Canon 50/1.8, without extension tubes, allows a maximum magnification of 1:6.66. The extender tubes by themselves are totally useless – they are used between the camera body and the lens to allow closer focusing. The effect is proportional to the focal length of the lens. The Kenko set comes with a set of 12, 20, and 36 mm tubes. If you use the 36 and 20 mm tubes on a 50 mm lens, you’ll get pretty close to 1:1 macro. You lose f-stops and the ability to focus at infinity. If you put the same extensions on a 200 mm lens, you’ll be able to focus closer than without the extenders, but not nearly as close as the lower focal length. If you happen to have a 28 mm lens around, this will allow you to focus even closer.
Warning – the focusing distance is a factor of the center-focus of the lens and the extension tube length. With low focal-length lenses it’s quite possible to add extenders until your maximum focus distance is inside the lens! This makes things a little trickey :> )
Do a google search on macro instruction – there are several good sites that explain the use of extension tubes, and other alternatives for getting macro images, much better than I can.
--
BJCP National
I read that extension tubes are less forgiving than closeup lenses, since they increase the lighting requirements and therefore you have to use a slower shutter speed. I guess you're sacrificing something with both methods; and the bottom line is that they both translate into a reduction in image quality. Assuming no tripod is used, it seems that the closeup lens might have a bit of an edge over the extension tubes, but that's just my (uneducated) opinion.
Jeff Peterman
Forum Pro
Closeup lenses are easy to use, and are reasonably cheap. However, you have to buy one to fit each of the lenses you want to use in macro mode (or get one large enough for the biggest lens and a set of step-down adapters for the other lenses).
Yes, extension tubes do cut down on the light - after all, you are capturing a smaller percentage of the image - but one set will work with all you EF lenses.
(By the way, I have all three - dedicated macro lenses, extension tubes, and close up filters.)
--
Jeff Peterman
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com
Yes, extension tubes do cut down on the light - after all, you are capturing a smaller percentage of the image - but one set will work with all you EF lenses.
(By the way, I have all three - dedicated macro lenses, extension tubes, and close up filters.)
--
Jeff Peterman
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com
M
Mark Plonsky
Guest
I recently got a nice sigma 50/2.8 macro off of FM for under $200. I have several macro lenses, but this one is the lightest/smallest that will go to lifesize (1:1) magnification.
--
Happy shooting,
Mark
http://www.mplonsky.com/photo
--
Happy shooting,
Mark
http://www.mplonsky.com/photo
You got a great deal with that lens. I'm seeing it on retail websites for about $240 or so. I didn't realize you could get a macro for that price. It's a lot closer to a price I could work with, but $200 would be better! Thanks for the suggestion--
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum