Do I need a macro lens?

[pressld2]

Hi All,

I really enjoy macro photography but have never owned a macro lens. I have used three different methods for close-ups, which are...

1. Just use a 400mm telephoto set to its closest focus, as for this peacock butterfly...



2. Same lens but with extension tubes, as for this cream-spot ladybird...



3. An old 50mm manual lens with reverse adapter, as for this crab spider...



All three methods have their drawbacks. Nos. 1 and 2 are both cropped images* - okay for the web but no good if you want an A3 print. No. 3 is full frame but has very shallow depth of field. This is because I had to keep the aperture fairly wide in order to get enough light through to focus and also because I can't mount my close-up flash units onto the lens when it's stuck on back-to-front. And sticking any lens on back to front means there are no contacts so you lose autofocus and exposure metering.

I have seen many stunning shots on WAB taken with macro lenses, not least those taken by Words, Eeyore and Fourwings on the recent thread Which macro lens started by MarkE70. But I can't help noticing that none of them are in the 3x2 format that most DSLRs produce, which makes me think that they too have been cropped. I don't want to shell out a hefty sum for a decent macro lens only to find that I still have to crop just as much as when using my extension tubes.

I guess what I'm looking for is something that will give me a reproduction ratio of 1:2 or higher with the same image quality as a Nikon (or Canon) prime lens. Are there macro lenses that will achieve that? Has anybody got one and what do they think of it?

Dave P.

*My camera is a Nikon D70 with a raw file of slightly over 3000 x 2000. No. 1 was cropped to 2100 x 1400 (roughly 1/3 of the full frame) and no. 2 was cropped to 1600 x 1050 (about a quarter of the frame).

[wildlifesnapper]

Hi Dave,

a macro lens will make life a lot easyer , no swapping about with extension tubes.
I use a tamron 90mm and a sigma 180mm and I am more than happy with them.They both focus to lifesize (35mm film) which with the nikon would be 1.5 x lifesize.If you fit your extension tubes to then they go well over lifesize.There is also the sigma 105mm and 150mm both just as good.
If you are going to do a lot of macro then yes I would say get a macro lens.If you can afford one I'm sure you'll love using it and not regret buying it one bit.

neil

[nightshade]

I used a 3.5 200mm tele with a 12mm tube or a 50mm or reversed 35mm
with part or full set of tubes they all have their uses and if you are comfortable
with that method......
I did however plump for a 105mm Sigma a very popular lense on this site as you
may have noticed(along with the heavier but excellent 150mm Sigma) I do not crop
and use it with a 1.4 kenko pro TC(gives me a 140mm) and a set of tubes in ones
and twos

[Jon]

Quite simply if you are intending on doing a reasonable amount of macro work then a macro lens is for you. It will prove to be much more convenient in use and you will get superb results. There is nothing at all wrong with your images but the macro lens will save all the messing about swapping tubes and reversing lenses etc. You will however still find the telephoto and a close up tube has it's uses i.e. when it is impossible to get within say 30 - 60cm of a subject. I use a 100mm macro and find it to be fine but if I bought again I would probably go for a 150 or 180mm provided they didn't prove to be too bulky.
Jon

[glsammy]

Dave,
Let me have your email address by PM and I'll send you a full frame close up taken with the sigma 150mm, that will ease you mind.
Don't forget most of us have to crop to get the image right for WAB, so your not seeing the full capability of the lens. The 150mm macro lens is the one lens I wouldn't swop for any other. As Steve said, it's a superb piece of kit.

[pressld2]

Thanks to everyone for the advice - you've convinced me that a macro lens will be a valuable addition to my camera bag.

Thanks especially to Graham for forwarding me a lovely full frame picture of a brimstone taken with his Sigma 150mm. In my early days of film photography (nearly 30 years ago now) I couldn't afford the Nikkor lenses and bought cheaper alternatives from Tamron, Optimax and Vivitar. I'm sorry to say that I was completely underwhelmed by all of them and when switching to digital I vowed that I would save up and only buy Nikon glass. Trouble is Nikon don't make a 150mm macro lens, the choice is between 105mm or 200mm. And the 200 is over £900. But I keep hearing very good things about Sigma, not just here but on other forums and in photography magazines, and there was certainly no lack of quality in the shot that Graham forwarded. So I'm thinking the Sigma 150mm is the one I'll go for. I can get it for £386 from Tecno but Warehouse Express say that if you can find it cheaper then them they will reduce by 125% of the difference. Which should mean I can get it for £376 from them - very tempting!

[eeyore]

Dave - if you pm me an email i will likewise send you an uncropped shot with the tamron 90mm - tho that said the bee on the thread to which you refer is very nearly uncropped - i just took a bit off one side to remove a distracting leaf

btw you might want to check out ebay's prices - see the email addy on the other thread -- you wont be able to use the price a a basis for a warehouse express deal but they might come in cheapetr than the lowest price you have anyway.

[pressld2]

Thanks Eeyore - will do. I'm fairly sure that I'll go for the Sigma 150 but it's always good to review everything before making a decision. I will try ebay too, but the main reason I'm interested in buying from Warehouse Express is the interest free finance option. I always like to spread the cost

[pressld2]

Warehouse Express came down to £379 on the price-matching and they will give me that price on interest free credit so that's the way I'm going. Thanks again to all for the advice.

Dave P.

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by pressld2

Warehouse Express came down to £379 on the price-matching and they will give me that price on interest free credit so that's the way I'm going. Thanks again to all for the advice.

Dave P.

I've had my Sigma 150 a few weeks now and I'm very pleased with it (I paid £330 from URGalaxy in Hong Kong, but the warranty seems questionable to say the least). The lens is difficult to handhold though and certainly needs a tripod/monopod to get the best from it.

Matt