Which macro objective do you use?

First pagePrevious pageof 2
Displaying 21 to 32 of 32 matches.
ProArtWork
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:08PM
Posted By Willowpix:

Posted By Mknofler:
I useCanon EF 100mm F2.8 L IS USM - and it is just fantastic and its worth every coin smile





Posted By kelvinjay:
^ Agreed. It's a great lens.


Everything I've read agrees. I'm hoping so. I just ordered it an hour ago. smile

You won't regret it!
Willowpix
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:42PM
^Fingers crossed.
TheShihan
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Mon Dec 3, 2012 1:31AM
I'm sure you will like it. It's really a great lens. Only limited by the ability of the photographer
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Mon Dec 3, 2012 1:38AM
Posted By TheShihan:
... Only limited by the ability of the photographer ;-)

Everything was sounding good until you said that.
AlpamayoPhoto
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Mon Dec 3, 2012 11:17AM
Posted By mlwinphoto:


I use 60, 105 and 200 macro lenses (Nikkors).  Each has its place in my macro work depending on subject matter, camera to subject distance, and the magnification I want to obtain. 


I rarely use the 60 as I like to get in close and this focal length doesn't give much working distance.  I use the 105 for most of my work but the 200 runs a close second.  The longer focal lengths give you adequate working distance so that you aren't blocking any of the light falling on your subject.  And, it you shoot insects (which I don't) the longer FL allow you to work far enough away so as to not disturb your subject.


I'm not familiar with the Canon lenses but as far as 3rd party choices are concerned take a look at Sigma.  I've read excellent reviews on their macro lenses.


Similarly, I have started with Nikkor 105mm f2.8 but moved to Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 (modern one is 70-200mm VR f2.8). Most of my flowers in my portfolio are shot with long lens and Extension Tubes. I have Nikkor Macro 60mm but rarely used. I have Close-up filters but never used them.


Recently I used Nikkor 300mm f4 with extension tubes to shoot Monarch butterflies and I was really happy with Bokeh and Image sharpness (no wind on that day!).
Willowpix
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Dec 8, 2012 5:34PM
Posted By Whiteway:

Posted By TheShihan:
... Only limited by the ability of the photographer ;-)


Everything was sounding good until you said that.


Yep, since that's the way it has to be, I've just sent mine back...


Not really. Got it a few days ago - haven't played much with it yet, but so far, so good!
Alan_Lagadu
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:43PM

Tamron 90mm 1:1 2.8f SP 272....   Magic macro lens and can be used on full frame Nikon when I can afford one, bought my 90mm for £230 unbelievable. Also excellent portrait and general lens. 90mm is a must and prime not zoom to get the full life size image of insects and the like, also you can stand back 29cm's not bothering your insect, because with a 40mm Tamron your too close and even over shadow the subject. Slightly better than the Nikon macro in tests. I've noticed lots of lens are made in China and Thialand, Tamron does this too but the top end models including the 90mm are still made in Japan I find this very reasurring. The same model being made for 8 years and awarded since first production.


 Tamron 90mm may be toppled by the Sigma EX GS OS HSM 105mm to be exact, but the Sigma is twice the price and I don't think full frame, correct me if I'm wrong.


 Being a true Macro/Micro I have been converted by the Tamron 90mm rather than steering away from close-up photography.
bahadir-yeniceri
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloads
Posted Mon Jan 7, 2013 7:20AM

I use Canon EF 100mm F2.8 L IS USM too


file_thumbview_approve
TheCrimsonMonkey
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:08PM
My Tamron 90mm is the bomb on my full frame Sony.
Somogyvari
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:54PM
Agreed Canon 100mm 2.8 is the best!!!
gipi23
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:55PM
Tamron 90mm seems very good, I have Nikkor 60/2.8, and yes, as long as one can not control the light, it is very tight, just too close. But I got it for excellent price, so, serves well as a portrait lens, too.
Royer
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:22PM
I'll mention the Zeiss 100mm Makro.  Fantastic lens.  Yes, I know it's not autofocus, and less than 1:1.  But,  I carry it more than my Nikon 105mm (an excellent Macro lens) because I like the Zeiss rendering and, this was important to me,  the Nikon is just not very good (imo) at longer distances/closer to infinity focus.  So, with camera bag space at a premium, I prefer a lens that both an excellent macro lens and an excellent mid-range telephoto.
This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 2
Displaying 21 to 32 of 32 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)