Now that I've got a DSLR, which macro lens should I buy?

[Mandragen]

Is the sigma 150 an internal focus or does the lense extend? I'm still confused on the nikon 105 VR or the sigma 150.

 

[BlueCorn]

I believe that's internal focus. When you look at the specs on the Sigma 105 they mention dimensions and extended dimensions. The 150 only lists one dimension.

 

[Mandragen]

thanks, I see that now. I know when using a lense for Macro work you use a tripod, but it might be nice to be able to do hand held walking around outside. How big of a roll does VR play in this? Would I miss the VR of the nikon 105? Does anyone have the sigma 150, what do you think? I know I would probably be happy with either, as I don't have or never have had a macro to compare it to. I only have nikon glass now, hesitant to go third party. I am one that usually enjoys a higher magnification, plus shooting nature it could come in handy.

 

[BlueCorn]

The 150 gives you the same magnification as the 105VR; 1:1. What the 150 gives you is an additional 3" of working space. I rarely shoot anything without a tripod so I'm probably not the best one to ask about VR (or IS).

 

[Mandragen]

lol I always mess up my camera terms. so the distance between the 105 and the 150 is only 3"? Hmm, now it doesn't seem worth it to go 3rd party and give up the VR

 

[NEK-ap24]

Hi Beerguy,

I am new to photography but absolutely hooked on the Macro images I see. (I am still shopping for a camera)

I ew and ah at Ricordea in photos more than in aquariums I think!

I saw in the OP how you stated "(If you shoot Olympus, you'll want to be looking at their 35mm, with their 2x crop factor it's functionally equivalent.)"

A photographer friend recommended that I consider purchasing an Oylmpus E620 to me with a 50mm Macro. I see you recommended looking into a 35mm lens.

My friend has not done aquarium work, and I can't afford to get it wrong!
With the 2x crop factor would the 50mm Olympus be most like the 100mm canon/nikon? (which seem to be very popular macros on this forum) Can you offer any insight on 35mm vs 50mm Macros for Oylmpus for me.

Thanks

 

[BlueCorn]

Both lenses give you the same magnification. The 50 gives you additional working room.

 

[NEK-ap24]

Thanks for the fast reply,

Could the extra working room of the 50 over the 35 every bite me in the ***?

If I am understanding you correctly, this working room means that I could get the same shot from the 50 at say (made up #'s) 10" that I could with the 35 at 6". If so that doesn't seem to be a problem, if anything the extra working room would be helpful, as my stand has a 6" lip on the front. Not big enough for a tripod, but keeps me from being right next to the glass.

Hopefully I am not looking at this backward

 

[BlueCorn]

That's basically it. Both do 1:1 magnification. The 35mm needs to be about 6" away to get that, the 50 can be about 9.5"

I've never experience a downside to extra working distance, assuming everything else is equal; e.g. aperture.

 

[NEK-ap24]

Excellent, thanks again. Now to show my wife.... I am capable of being taught. On second thought, maybe she doesn't need to know. It will only raise expectations.

 

[amehel0]

for alot of people it depends what they want to achieve. i have a 5d mk2. why did i go with canon? the mp e-65. nikon currently offers no alternative. if your after 1:1 then the more working distance the better. i use a 180mm lens with gives me 480mm working distance at 1:1. this means that with wider or deeper tanks you can photo things at the back. as someone pointed aperture is very important particularly in reef tanks and sps. also you may find that halides arent enough light and sometimes you need a off camera flash. for interesting photography i like to use the mp e 65 for the 5x mag you can get. although not practical in most aquarium situations but great for flowers. overall you cant go wrong with a 100mm lens. also keep in mind with extension tubes the longer focal lengths arent as effectively magnified. they also severly reduce DOF and light and they remove the infinity focus and reduce working distance.

 

[amehel0]

also keep in mind that alot of macro lenses can double up as telephoto or portrait lenses. some of my fav shots are with my 180mm photographing non macro stuff mainly because of its beautiful BOKEH!

 

[route66]

I have the cannon rebel hand me down from my husband and a few lens and he loves the ESO 7D with his macro lens. I ask him if that new macro lens would fit my camera he said no. I afraid to take it off his 7D So I just use his camera .LOL

 

[BlueCorn]

What model is your Rebel?

It's very likely, that he's not telling the truth.

 

[ahebert923]

Does anyone have knowledge on any Sony lens? I got a DSLR a few years ago and would LOVE to get great tank shots.

 

[wtildens]

Just a suggestion, but if your thinking of spend 1000$+ on a lens you might want to check out Lensrental.com. i've used them several times and they are pretty good.

You can get a couple for a few days for under a 100$ (depends on which lens)

hope this helps a bit.

 

[Ouscazz]

Well for Canon, the IS means Image Stabilization, so it will correct some errors for you if your hand shakes from trying to hold for a long exposure. That being said, most aquarium shots, you are going to want/ need to use a tripod. Since you will be using a tripod, IS isn't necessary, and in fact, most people say to turn IS off (VR if you are a Nikon guy like me ) when using a tripod.

I would say go for the IS version. Simply because you don't need to use your tripod anymore for shooting aquarium macros. With the IS lens, you are more able to shoot macros "on the fly". I've using one on my EOS 5D and I'm totally thrilled by it's stunning performance.

These were shot a couple of days ago, freehand.

A freehand shot of my bass guitar, pretty narrow DOF.

A freehand shot of a wild Capri lizzard, sharp and detailed.

 

[BlueCorn]

You're fooling yourself. All of those shots would have been better with a tripod or some sort of camera support.

You could probably drive your car with your feet if you tried. That doesn't mean you should.

 

[Ouscazz]

You're fooling yourself. All of those shots would have been better with a tripod or some sort of camera support.

Probably, yes.. but nowadays I don't have to get the Manfrotto out of the closet anymore. Life has become a bit easier, isn't that what it's all about?

 

[jim13csulb]

My recommendation would be to literally buy the best quality glass you can afford. I use canon L lens and they are magnificent, Nikon has a similar line of professional series lenses. But unless your shooting for magazines, websites, or businesses those are kinda pricey for most needs. I have shot some pics using a tamaron macro. I think it was a 60mm f2. It was actually a really nice lens for what the price is.


The main thing is to simply get away from any kit lens or lens that are not "true" macro. anything with a 1:1 will work wonderfully