p.1 #1 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
I have been surfing the net for the past 1 1/2 weeks for reviews, test shot, comparison amongst macro lens. I have to admit that my brain is flooded with information and about to explode. I like to shoot macro and I am want to shoot macro but I feel the frustration now from not having proper equipment... no macro lens
I did purchased an old Pentacon and have a reverse ring on the way... But I am not convinced that this setup, although cheap and promising, will let me shoot macro at ease in all condition (maybe I underestimate).
So down with the spec... I have a Canon 40D but I have absolutely no limitation on the lens side.... meaning that I am not restricting myself to EOS mount. I rediscovered the Manual focus world and I am considering any lens with aperture control (Manual or Auto) that can fit a Canon EOS body BUT, the lens that need an adapter with a lens in it to keep infinity focus... For Example, I rule out any Canon FD lens or Minolta lens (not trusting glass quality of those adapters compare to the lens in front).
For the rest, budget is 400$ with a slight possibility to extend but not much for now. Auto Focus is a nice to have but above all, I want quality in optic and built. Focal length has to be 100 mm (FF), not considering Digital lens (dreaming of having a FF one day) I want it to be usable for other things than just Macro...
Pour partir le bal, as we say in french... I know a lot of people will suggest a used Canon 100 f2.8 Macro, but is there no other lens from the past that could compete with it and have that built quality from the past (Manual Focus lens)?
p.1 #2 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
quesque tu attend? .for 400 a used canon 100,non-IS would be my choice for your budget,hands down.i got my tamron 180,for 450,which is another great lens,with longer working distance.
p.1 #3 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
Not much I guess... That is why I said I could extend the budget and also that I was considering all sorts of Macro, New and, in that price range, mostly Old ones.
If I drop a few lens I was watching that seemed promising, I saw 3 in the medium format world 100% manual and
Of course I saw some Canon 100 2.8 at this price, but as I said... was expecting maybe some lens 100% manual in some brand that would not have the electronic but, more lens quality...
This thread is the reason I looked at those medium format... Of course I have to drop in a 70$ for the lens adapter... Archive Medium Format lens on SLR
p.1 #5 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
Wow ! Following your comment I was wondering if you had some sample pictures of what you did with the lens.... I stumbled upon your website, very very nice pictures.
Looking at your profile I see you do have some other Macro lens/equipment. Can you point out a few shot you did with the Tamron? And how is the feeling of the manual focus? I have the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and find it a little loose when turning. Also, considering this fact, I was overlooking Tamron as a whole since I find that mine lack some sharpness.
But looking at your pictures, it is definitely worth adding in the list, thanks.
p.1 #9 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
nainsurvolte wrote:
I have been surfing the net for the past 1 1/2 weeks for reviews, test shot, comparison amongst macro lens. I have to admit that my brain is flooded with information and about to explode. I like to shoot macro and I am want to shoot macro but I feel the frustration now from not having proper equipment... no macro lens
I did purchased an old Pentacon and have a reverse ring on the way... But I am not convinced that this setup, although cheap and promising, will let me shoot macro at ease in all condition (maybe I underestimate).
So down with the spec... I have a Canon 40D but I have absolutely no limitation on the lens side.... meaning that I am not restricting myself to EOS mount. I rediscovered the Manual focus world and I am considering any lens with aperture control (Manual or Auto) that can fit a Canon EOS body BUT, the lens that need an adapter with a lens in it to keep infinity focus... For Example, I rule out any Canon FD lens or Minolta lens (not trusting glass quality of those adapters compare to the lens in front).
For the rest, budget is 400$ with a slight possibility to extend but not much for now. Auto Focus is a nice to have but above all, I want quality in optic and built. Focal length has to be 100 mm (FF), not considering Digital lens (dreaming of having a FF one day) I want it to be usable for other things than just Macro...
Pour partir le bal, as we say in french... I know a lot of people will suggest a used Canon 100 f2.8 Macro, but is there no other lens from the past that could compete with it and have that built quality from the past (Manual Focus lens)?
i'd still say get the 100mm macro from canon or their 60mm ef-s
and AF can, at it times, be more useful for macro than you might think, if you have one with quick USM like that lens or the 100L
or get the 60mm EF-S macro if you are ok with a little bit less working distance, it's almost nicer and costs less, but it does have a bit less working distance, whether that little bit matters to you i dont know
although sigma and tamron have some nice macros too (worse if you do decide to use macro AF though)
p.1 #10 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
charlandk wrote:
I bought a used Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro lens for $400. I love it!
It`s true, my initial research for a brand new macro lens brought me to the 150 Sigma. I looked in PBase and in other places where I could see macro photo, and it was my initial choice. But that was 5-6 years ago, and the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) was really low at the time.
It got up a bit but still not to the point where I can afford one used... at least the one I found is 579$. And the new one, with OS, I don`t even mention it.
p.1 #11 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
Thanks Micheal,
As Lord V made me realize, the Tamron is now a contender... In addition I can surely go to some place and feel it (manual focus, auto focus, built quality). In addition, I checked and it is advertise and sold by Tamron Canada at 479$ CAN.... While its 499$US at B&H with a 50$ MIR that I cannot use as a Canadian. Really worth looking at.
p.1 #12 · What would be the best Macro Lens for 400$
skibum5 wrote:
i'd still say get the 100mm macro from canon or their 60mm ef-s
and AF can, at it times, be more useful for macro than you might think, if you have one with quick USM like that lens or the 100L
or get the 60mm EF-S macro if you are ok with a little bit less working distance, it's almost nicer and costs less, but it does have a bit less working distance, whether that little bit matters to you i dont know
although sigma and tamron have some nice macros too (worse if you do decide to use macro AF though)
The 100mm if far from not being considered, I was just trying to show that I am open to anything even old manual focus. And you are right, since I had the chance to own both USM, non USM and third party lens, USM is really impressive. Although my third party lens (Tamron 28-75) was never recognized for having a fast focus. I just don`t know how Sigma`s HSM compare to the Canon`s USM though...
As for the 60mm, it is maybe a good lens, but going full frame is my goal one day, so I rule out EF-s.
.for 400 a used canon 100,non-IS would be my choice for your budget,hands down.i got my tamron 180,for 450,which is another great lens,with longer working distance.
