Macro Help

Gwenhwyfar · Post by **Gwenhwyfar** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:19 am

I want to buy a Macro lens for my canon SLR 300D.
iv'e already got a canon 18-55mm Lens & a 75-300 canon ultrasonic zoom lens.
So I want a specilist Macro lens.
I was thinking of a Sigma 50mm F/2.8 Ex Dg Macro Lens Af. Would this do the job?
I would like to do close up pictures like OY, Wayne & V6GTO
do so would this lens be suitable?

All replies to be made in plain simple english as i'm not that technicaly minded

Martin · Post by **Martin** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:31 am

Hi,
I'm sorry I have no experience with that particular lens

. I use, and highly reccomend, the Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro. I also use a set of Jessops extention tubes and would advise buying those first as it's cheaper, and you might find that with your 300mm lens that's all you need. It all depends how close you want to get...

This close...

this close....

...or this close?

Martin.

PS It all depends on how big your wallet is

Oy · Post by Oy » Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:02 pm

I used to have the Sigam 50mm and it's a fine lens - BUT it needs you to be VERY close to get decent macro shots.

I did get some good shots with it - but it's MUCH easier now that I've swapped it for the Sigam 150mm.

I'd recommend either the Sigma 105mm or the 150mm for insect work. The 150mm if your budget stretches that far.

David Tipping · Post by **David Tipping** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:32 pm

I can't comment from experience here, so maybe some other forum users might like to add something...
On another thread, I saw the Raynox DCR-150 macro lens recommended. As I understand, it's something that you clip on to the front of whatever lens you normally use - it has a universal attachment. I've ordered one but am still awaiting delivery.
I sourced mine on ebay at less than £30, including postage (from the USA). It is certainly a much cheaper option than a 'proper' lens and the reports I've read elsewhere on this site seem very favourable. Worth considering, perhaps?

Wayne · Post by **Wayne** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:10 pm

Hi

I also have the 300D and I saved up and got the 100mm USM Canon Macro. Very nice lens, I can fill the frame with a butterfly from over a foot away. (retails at close to £400, I got mine on Ebay for £319 new)

For more depth of field you can get the 60mm EF-S Macro, designed for our camera it gives you true 1:1 macro and with it being a shorter lens you get more depth of field. (retails for approx £320 but on ebay much cheaper)
This option might be better for butterflies, and the 100mm one for even smaller creatures.

As for the Sigma lens, I dont have any experience with it, but I'm told that the Canon version has faster, more accurate auto-focus.

The thing that made me chose the 100mm was the fact I can take it with me if I ever buy a full size sensor camera or even a film camera. This would also be handy if you got the Sigma.

Anyhoo, hope this helps,

Andrew R · Post by **Andrew R** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:27 pm

Hi, have a look at Which Digital Camera magazine September 2006.
I have just bought it and it gives a comparison test on Macro lenses.

Andy

Gwenhwyfar · Post by **Gwenhwyfar** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:11 pm

Thank you very much for all the info you have provided, I only chose Sigma as it appeared to be a hundred pounds cheaper than the actuall canon make.

I think i will pass on the one i was thinking of, as someone lent me (can't remember what it was called) something which meant I was actually right in the butterflies face before I could see it - also focusing was really hard and by the time i was happy with what i was seeing, it dissapeared.
So if the Sigma 50mm does this then obviously not the one for me.

I will look up your suggestions and save up a bit more money.

Fantastic shots Martin.

Many thanks again.

Post by **Pete Eeles** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:54 pm

I personally use a Sigma 105mm EX macro lens and it's fine for my purposes

Cheers,

- Pete