DSLRUsers.com

Just wondering what people are using for a macro lens and what they've found is good, bad or over-priced?

I recommend the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 very highly (which I have).

Not only is it a supern macro but it gives pin sharp normal shots as well.

If I had to choose another I would probably go for the 180mm Sigma for the added reach.

Chris

I'm using the macro on my Tamron 70-300, and given that the lens cost around $240, it definitely isn't overpriced. And it isn't bad either.

However, I am lusting a 1:1 (The Tamron is 1:2), and currently looking at the Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro which will be considerably cheaper than the Nikon.

Edit..(Just read Chris's post which slid in before mine, and the Sigma is looking better and better!!!)

Greg B - I have posted some shots with the Sigma micro at fotopic

Chris PS - Flyer has also shown some great shots in macro and he uses a Sigma plus a reversed lens on the front

I use a sigma 28-300 macro with a nikon 6t closeup diopter attached... M mode and manual focus.

If I was to get a 'real' macro lens I wouldn't go past the tamron 90mm macro with the 3 set of kenko extension tubes and the kenko 1.4 pro teleconvertor.... and if I had spare cash i'd also get a bellows

just remember that increasing the focal lenght does not get you closer shots... it just increases the distance you can be away from the subject... to increase from 1:1 you will need bellow, ext tubes, etc etc blah.

Thanks Chris. The sigma really does look the goods, those shots are excellent. Birdie is kindly getting me a price over the next couple of weeks, anything could happen and probably will!

To clarify;

I currently have a Tamron 70-300 which as someone mentioned has 1:2 Macro, but minimum distance for focussing is a real pain.. I'd prefer to get down on my hands and knees and get up close to whatever i'm shooting than try to find a spot away from the subject on the right angle..

People keep mentioning close-up filters and things like that.. can anyone tell me how they work? What they cost? etc?

Hi Platinum, I have a Nikon 6T, looks like a magnifying glass which is threaded like a filter. Screws in and "Voila" can focus close. Not as good as a real macro, but much cheaper, cant remember the cost of mine but under $100 (maybe $80) details are in bargains. Ring a biggish store and see what they quote

PlatinumWeaver wrote:To clarify;

I currently have a Tamron 70-300 which as someone mentioned has 1:2 Macro, but minimum distance for focussing is a real pain.. I'd prefer to get down on my hands and knees and get up close to whatever i'm shooting than try to find a spot away from the subject on the right angle..

Yep. All of that. Although interestingly, one of the good things always mentioned about the 105 compared to the 60mm macro is that you do not need to get so close to the subject - good for shooting the scared and/or unco-operative. I was pretty happy with the longer focussing distance when I shot the spider with the 70-300 ....
http://www.pixspot.com/displayimage.php ... 8&pos=-201

But I would really like that sigma 105 f2.8

Glen wrote:Hi Platinum, I have a Nikon 6T, looks like a magnifying glass which is threaded like a filter. Screws in and "Voila" can focus close. Not as good as a real macro, but much cheaper, cant remember the cost of mine but under $100 (maybe $80) details are in bargains. Ring a biggish store and see what they quote

And this could be attached to, say... the kit lens?

Glen: Macro's of spiders will almost definately never be done by me, I cannot stand the creepy little guys.. squash squash I say!

Thanks for the info guys

Aaah - I see the 6T is 62mm.. What have you got it attached to at the moment?

Dean.... you could get a step-up ring if you wish to use the 6T

I use the Sigma 70-300 APO & some of the shots have been great others have been not good at all.
I’ve put this down as being lazy & not getting my tripod

Cheers
Ray

PW... I think you will find most of us with the 6T will use it with a 70-300 that has a matching thread... also the magnificaton of the 6T works well with that focal range. Also have a look at the 5T. Not sure if anyone has yet suggested it but getting a reversal ring and using that with a 50/1.8 is another economic option.

I've got the 60mm macro lens. I specifically bought that for shooting flowers so therefore it is not a problem having to get close to the subject. If I were to get more serious about bugs, butterflies etc. I'd probably go for the Sigma 180. It all depends on how much you want to spend and what type of macros you want to take (i.e. floral, bugs etc.).

As the others mentioned there are other options for macro work. Close Up Diopters, extentions tubes, reversing lenses etc.

The following pic was a grab shot - the rose was blowing in a gale the other day. Shot on the Sigma 105mm EX DG



Chris

Platinum, I use mine on a 70-210

I have the 60mm Micro Nikkor, too. I love this lens. It served me well with my film cameras (801s and FE2) and now is doing great things with my new D70.

This is the full image of a ruler resized from 3008x2000 to 800x532:



And this is just cropping 800x532 of the full image without resizing:

ATJ - I used the 60mm Nikkor for a very long time and I have to agree that it is an amazing lens - I am just sorry that I sold it