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

[BCasper]

Originally Posted by jhildebrand

Can you recommend the best bang-for-buck Nikon on that list?

I have used several lenses, but my favorite is the Sigma 105mm f2.8. It's super sharp, fast to focus, and not super expensive (I guess that's all relative). Just my $.02

[MichaelW]

Does anyone have experience with the tamron 100mm macro lens? I have seen good reviews for it but not specifically for aquarium coral photos

[Misled]

Tamron makes a 90mm macro. It is very good.

[MichaelW]

I apologize I meant tokina 100mm macro lens. My mistake.

[lpsouth1978]

Hello all, I just bought my first DLSR, a Nikon D5500 w/ 18-55mm VR II kit lens and 55-200 VR II kit lens. I also ordered a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 Prime lens. I was hoping that these 3 lenses would be the lenses that I would get the most use out of, but it sounds like I may be better served by also getting a macro lens. Is this thinking right, or would the 50mm lens do a good enough job?

It looks like the 50mm lens has a minimum focus distance of .45m or ~1.5'.

[Misled]

Yes, for the close-ups you see here, you'll need a "true" macro lens.

[RTab619]

Following

[The Haj]

I have been searching for some time for an nice, I believe 1:1 macro lens for my Nikon d90. I would love to be able to zoom like you did on that red blasto,on for an lens with that capability for my Nikon d90? Thank you

Originally Posted by Ouscazz

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.

[Misled]

IMO:

Best=Nikon 105mm macro

next=Tamron 90mm macro

next=Sigma 105mm macro

I've owned all three at one point or another.

[Misled]

IMO:

Best=Nikon 105mm macro

next=Tamron 90mm macro

next=Sigma 105mm macro

I've owned all three at one point or another.

[The Haj]

Thank you so much

[Misled]

For the price, the Tamron is a great lens. On the 90, you can even go with an older model with the screw drive AF. It's a little slower at auto focus, but for most macros, you'll want manual focus anyway.

[The Haj]

Thank you sir, I truly appreciate all your help.

[The Haj]

Would love to find any of these 3 if someone has any of them available on this forum. Please message me if you do.

[spscrackhead]

whats a good bang for your buck for canon? I was looking at the canon 100mm macro and 60mm macro. At half the price, the 60 seems attractive. I will be using it mostly in my 6x2x2 tank and 4x2x1 frag tank. should i just go for the extra length of the 100? or will the 60 do?
Open to other options as well.
Thanks

[scuzy]

Look into a Sigma 150mm macro awesome lens fort macro photography. I use it on my 5D.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spscrackhead]

Originally Posted by scuzy

Look into a Sigma 150mm macro awesome lens fort macro photography. I use it on my 5D.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 1000$ Lens?

[scuzy]

Well I got mine used for half of that from ebay


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Acrid Dragon]

You have really cool equipment! I'd like to have this stuff too. You can find many articles on Weedit photos website to know how to use it now.

[sh4rkbyt3]

Good forum and posts here. Regardless of the brand or type of camera most recommendations you see on lenses here are generally the accepted ones for a reason. Same as why 35mm, 50mm and 85 "prime lenses" are accepted portrait type lenses. They have other purposes but they're known (as are some others) to be good for that type of photography especially if there are budget limitations.

Many photographers long before us have found these lenses to be the likely best at what they do through thousands of photos. It doesn't really matter if you use a Sony, a Canon or a Nikon, the lenses themselves are known to be very good at what they're intended for.

Brands of lenses each have their own inherent issues and good research will tell you what these may be. Fortunately with sites like youtube and individual review sites, it's much easier to see for yourself what brand/model/product is best for you. A true bonus for the consumer.

I've bought thousands of dollars of camera equipment for shooting mostly landscape but I know if I want to add "macro" into the realm the 105mm "fixed" is likely my best choice. I can also go with a 90mm but those two are likely to be the best ones. It doesn't matter if I'm using a T5 Rebel or a D7100 or some other camera brand/model. I can make other lenses work (possibly) but those two are known to be great at macro marketwide.

Kit lenses (18-55 and 55-200) are acceptable for most average type photos but they are what they are. They aren't great lenses but they will sometimes give you a great photo under the right conditions. Kit lenses are intended to get you started.

Good glass costs money and its costly because it works and is of better quality. Cheaping out on a lens will likely get you what you paid for, it's an unfortunate truism if you're on a budget.

[FullBoreReefer]

Hello, my gf and I just picked up a Cannon rebel t6 for a fairly good price. Any recommendations for a macro lense WITH OUT breaking the bank? We are 100% hobbiest and not a photography business. It is all for pleasure so we don't need the best of the best.

Thanks in advanve!

[FullBoreReefer]

Originally Posted by FullBoreReefer

Hello, my gf and I just picked up a Cannon rebel t6 for a fairly good price. Any recommendations for a macro lense WITH OUT breaking the bank? We are 100% hobbiest and not a photography business. It is all for pleasure so we don't need the best of the best.

Thanks in advanve!

[Misled]

I don't do Canon, but you can look into off brand lenses like the Tamron 90mm or the Sigma 105mm.

[scuzy]

Can't beat a Canon 100mm they have the regular one or the L lens. Either is great for macros.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[five.five-six]

Originally Posted by Misled

IMO:

Best=Nikon 105mm macro

next=Tamron 90mm macro

next=Sigma 105mm macro

I've owned all three at one point or another.

I have been using a P&S with screw on filters, MF, WB evaluate, ISO, shutter speed and aperture settings for some time. It's frustrating and time consuming but I can get some pretty nice pictures.

My wife has an iPad pro, while her photos don't come out as good as mine, it only takes her a moment to make the shot and they aren't horrible


I see MF nikon 105 macros on ebay for cheep, is that going to do what I want to do on a D100 or D200 body?

The only photography I'm interested in is coral macros.