# Help choosing macro lens



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

Familiar w/ cameras and Macro lenses .. Not Canon in part. except that over time they changed their lens mount.
I assume you want a dedicated lens and not front snap on adapters? 

A recommended used source for stuff..

https://www.keh.com/shop/catalogsearch/result/?q=canon+macro
https://www.keh.com/shop/canon-ef-100mm-f-2-8-macro-usm-lens.html
https://www.adorama.com/alc/0008512/article/100-in-100-Part-II-Macro-lens-buying-guide

http://lenshero.com/lenses/Canon-Rebel-T5-macro-lens

Don't ignore 3rd party Macros.
http://lenshero.com/lens/Tamron-SP-60mm-f2-Di-II-LD-Macro-Canon-ef-lens
http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/tamron/60mm-f2-di-ii-ld-if-macro-1:1-sp-af/review/
https://www.keh.com/shop/tamron-60m...or-dslrs-for-canon-aps-c-sensor-dslrs-55.html




> To really get close to your subject, invest in a macro lens or a set of diopters. A true macro lens, which enables you to get really, really close to your subjects, is an expensive proposition; expect to pay around $200 or more. But if you enjoy capturing the tiny details in life, it’s worth the investment. For a less expensive way to go, you can spend about $40 for a set of diopters, which are sort of like reading glasses that you screw onto your existing lens. The downfall of diopters, sadly, is that they typically produce images that are very soft around the edges — a problem that doesn’t occur with a good macro lens.


also remeber that w/ the APC sensor and multiplier of 1.62 for the Rebel a 60mm lens is an "Effective" 96mm due to crop factor..


----------



## xmas_one (Feb 5, 2010)

You can get decent results with the "normal" lens you already have, pick up a set of extension tubes on eBay.


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

xmas_one said:


> You can get decent results with the "normal" lens you already have, pick up a set of extension tubes on eBay.


Extension tubes won't work w/ many "computerized" cameras. at least not very conveniently..

In the same vein using a reversing ring "works" too.. All kludgy


----------



## xmas_one (Feb 5, 2010)

jeffkrol said:


> Extension tubes won't work w/ many "computerized" cameras. at least not very conveniently..
> 
> In the same vein using a reversing ring "works" too.. All kludgy


They do "work", you are just forced to full manual and no AF. They also cost several hundred dollars less than a decent dedicated macro lens.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

For the price, IQ and size you really can't go wrong with the Canon 60mm. I think I mentioned it in my macro thread. It's small enough to handhold as well. Unless your doing alot of insects you don't need anything with a longer reach.


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

houseofcards said:


> For the price, IQ and size you really can't go wrong with the Canon 60mm. I think I mentioned it in my macro thread. It's small enough to handhold as well. Unless your doing alot of insects you don't need anything with a longer reach.


Well all of this depends if the o/p wants to even go that high in price..

Between Tamron and Canon neitrhe would be the wrong choice for macro.
Some other factors do come into play when choosing

Tamron 2.0 aperture, smoother bokeh for portraits Near as I can find slightly sharper.
Canon USM (quiet and faster) , Cheaper retail I believe, supposedly higher resale value.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

jeffkrol said:


> Well all of this depends if the o/p wants to even go that high in price..
> 
> Between Tamron and Canon neitrhe would be the wrong choice for macro.
> Some other factors do come into play when choosing
> ...


Which macro lens are you using?


----------



## someoldguy (Feb 26, 2014)

The Canon 60mm macro is pretty well regarded , but I'd recommend a 100 mm or so . I use one on my 7D Mk2 . The big advantage is it gives you a longer focal length when the 1.6 crop factor is added in ( effectively a 160mm ) This means you can stand back a bit more from your subject in comparison the the 60mm . Plus , it makes a great portrait lens .Try to get a used one (try B&H , Adorama , or KEH) ,or a refurb off the Canon website . Just know that there are/were 3 different 100mm Canon macros . You DON'T want the one with the 52mm filter threads ; this is a lens that was discontinued years and years ago . The 100mm with the 58mm front threads is still in production and is rock solid . There's also a 100mm with image stabilization , supposed to be great , but it's pricy , even used . Sigma,Tamron , and Tokina all make 90-100mm macros in Canon mounting. Might be a lot cheaper than a Canon , but can't offer any advice as to their build quality . 

Took these with my 7D2 and the Canon 100 macro ...


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

The 100mm is definitely a great lens as well, but double the price and size of the 60mm. And unless your main goal is insects doesn't offer much benefit for aquarium fish photography. Nice shots BTW


----------



## someoldguy (Feb 26, 2014)

Thanks .... but it's really good for other stuff besides bugs . Used to do miniature orchids , small bits of circuitry , all sorts of stuff . But for fish , its' big advantage , for me at least , is the extra reach so I don''t need to get right up on the tank .


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

someoldguy said:


> Thanks .... but it's really good for other stuff besides bugs . Used to do miniature orchids , small bits of circuitry , all sorts of stuff . But for fish , its' big advantage , for me at least , is the extra reach so I don''t need to get right up on the tank .


Not saying it can''t do alot, just saying the reach comes in really handy with bugs since they'll scatter if you get too close. In an aquarium the fish are confined so its' not as important. They're also accustomed to having people near the tank.

It really depends on budget and what the OP wants to shoot. Also the size of the 60mm is more conducive to walking around with.


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

houseofcards said:


> Which macro lens are you using?


Depends on the day.. I have 1/2 doz of them for a Pentax K-3

My favorite (for uniqueness) is a Vivitar 90-180 Macro zoom ff Series one:
Like this one:









small sample:









OPP's might be the Pentax 50mm Macro


opps opps 100mm DFA Pentax Macro..


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

jeffkrol said:


> D
> My favorite (for uniqueness) is a Vivitar 90-180 Macro zoom ff Series one:


That might be a good lens for outdoor macro, but I would never recommend it for indoor fish photography. With an min F4.5, at would be very tough to get a fast enough shutter without using OCF. Which is another expensive item. The Canon 100mm and 60mm both of F2.8.


----------



## Stacy1 (Dec 15, 2016)

Wow! Thanks for all the responses. I forgot tossubscribe to this thread when I made it and forgot that I posted it until today. Sucks getting old lol. I just want to be able to take good pics of my fish, plants,and shrimp in my tanks. I paid like 1300 for the t4i when it first came out knowing absolutely nothing about quality cameras and still use my cell phone most of the time. I've figured out how to take ok pics with it but rhe package I bought only came with two lens, one being a zoom, but it does not take what I consider to be good pics in my tanks. It's probably more user error than anything else but everyone seems to agree that to get the type of pics I want I need macro. Macro what? No idea. Its all greek to me. I will check out all the links posted and thanks for the suggestions


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Stacy1 said:


> Wow! .... I just want to be able to take good pics of my fish, plants,and shrimp in my tanks.


Just a quick tip, if you are wanting the lens to take good pics of fish in your tanks then the lens must be fast. That is one with a small F number preferably 2.8 or less. If you get something with a min number of 4.5 or higher it will be very difficult for you to achieve the shutter speed necessary for a sharp and properly exposed image unless you use an off camera flash or through an incredible amount of light on the tank. I can't state how important this is in aquarium fish photography.


----------



## jeffkrol (Jun 5, 2013)

Stacy1 said:


> It's probably more user error than anything else but everyone seems to agree that to get the type of pics I want I need macro. Macro what? No idea. Its all greek to me. I will check out all the links posted and thanks for the suggestions


you don't need a Macro lens really..
It will be more lighting and technique like house of cards said.

That said, a Macro in the stable is, for me, a need/want

Example photo using a 50 f1.7 manual focus prime.. NOT A REAL good photo but the point is using a Macro poorly will get you less than using any lens/technique well..
note the fish ..esp. the Tetra.
Huge jpg so its a link:
http://www.qualiteitems.com/images/sample.JPG

high iso so it's a bit soft and did little post processing..


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Yes it is technique, but a fast macro lens is the best chance for sharp well exposed pictures. If your taking full tank shots you don't need a macro. But if you want sharp detail of fish then a macro is your best bet.

These were both taken with the Canon 60mm.


----------



## doylecolmdoyle (Sep 22, 2015)

I use the Canon EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens on my old 7d camera, I picked both up second hand and they work well for me, one thing I would say is taking macro photos of fish is not easy, you need a flash and lots of practice! I often will take 50 - 100 shots to just just a couple of decent photos. Here are some photos of my micro fish I have shot with my macro lens.

IMG_0032 by Colm Doyle, on Flickr

IMG_9945 by Colm Doyle, on Flickr

IMG_9830 by Colm Doyle, on Flickr


----------



## Stacy1 (Dec 15, 2016)

So JEALOUS! Beautiful pics guys. Thats exactly what I'm wanting to get out of my pics. Ive wrote the numbers down and am going to check out the links for shopping listed above and see if I can find me something. I take hundreds of pics trying to get good pics now but they are only going to be so good with my Samsung phone. I need to spend some time in this subforum and start getting more familiar with my camera. And a macro lens.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

As you could see from @doylecolmdoyle the 100 and 60 will both serve you well. My only difference in opinion is that if you get a fast lens you don't always need a separate flash. Depends on budget the 60 is less than the 100 and is also easier to handhold and walk around with and use as a 'regular' lens. If you said insects I would definitely recommend the 100mm. Both have very good image quality. 

Here's a couple taken without a flash.


----------



## travellife (Sep 11, 2013)

houseofcards said:


> Yes it is technique, but a fast macro lens is the best chance for sharp well exposed pictures. If your taking full tank shots you don't need a macro. But if you want sharp detail of fish then a macro is your best bet.
> 
> These were both taken with the Canon 60mm.


Excellent shots especially with the black background.


----------



## viwwo (Jan 15, 2010)

I'm not a Canon person so I don't know what is specifically out there for it but a PRIME lens is the way to go. Don't get any additions or zooms or other gimmicks. They just add noise and distortions to the image. The less glass between you and the subject the better. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## viwwo (Jan 15, 2010)

And don't be scared to get used or refurbished lenses. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

travellife said:


> Excellent shots especially with the black background.


Thanks!


----------



## bennett (Dec 25, 2008)

Tamron makes a great macro. https://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AFF01...9&sr=8-3&keywords=tamron+macro+lens+for+canon


----------



## jsarrow (Jun 10, 2008)

travellife said:


> Excellent shots especially with the black background.


Great pictures and super impressive considering no flash. Is it just you and the camera with no additional equipment? I'm trying to figure out technique now that I have a camera and lens and any tips on how you set up these shots would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

jsarrow said:


> Great pictures and super impressive considering no flash. Is it just you and the camera with no additional equipment? I'm trying to figure out technique now that I have a camera and lens and any tips on how you set up these shots would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks!


Thanks. Yep just me, camera and lens. 

Lens wise having a fast macro lens helps a lot. So you'd want an aperture of at least 2.8 or wider. This allows more light in so you can use a faster shutter. Camera wise if your camera can handle a high ISO seting like 1600/3200/6400 without getting too grainy this again will allow you to use a faster shutter speed to catch a crisp image that isn't too dark. 

You'll also want to throw as much light as possible on top of the tank. So the brightest you can make your light or throw another light on it as well, will give you more room to work with in term of the exposure.


----------



## jsarrow (Jun 10, 2008)

Thanks again houseofcards, really appreciate the info.


----------

