Canon Digital Rebel XT Photos!

[SaigonK]

So I have the kit lens, which is okay but not so clean.
The 100-300 i have is great, if it is high noon....
The 50mm Canon I bought is a great lens for the cash..

I finally bought the 580EX flash for the camera,. which rocks!

But now I want to get a macro lens for my collection, I am thinking either a Sigma or a Canon lens. Anyone care to offer suggesitons? Money is an issue, but i am willing to spend up to $500....

Bought a Canon 100MM USM Macro Lens (f2.8) and it rocks, talk about auper quiet! Amazing lens!

I only got a chance to take these photos so far, check them out here:

http://www.is12.net/index.php?showimage=191

http://www.is12.net/index.php?showimage=192

http://www.is12.net/index.php?showimage=194


http://www.is12.net/index.php?showimage=195

http://www.is12.net/index.php?showimage=196

 

[OulOat]

Saving thread for later, since I got a rebel too.

 

[SaigonK]

I am also wondering if i should get extension tubes for my current lenses, any thoughts?

 

[DigDug]

The Tokina 12-24mm F4 is a *superb* lens with L-like quality. This is one of several lenses available by 3rd parties that the Lens gods somehow had shown down upon during design (check out the Tamron AF 28-75mm f2.8 for another L-quality lens for a ridiculous price). The build quality is fantastic as well - far better than any comparably priced Canon lens (macro or not). After alot of researching and thinking, I ended up choosing this lens as it was the best balance of price and macro-width - it comes with a lens hood (necessary for macro lenses) which another $100 (if I recall correctly) investment should you go the Canon route.

Do some reading up at FredMiranda.com. Note that their review section ratings don't always comport with the "real" reviews that people give in the actual forums. Do a search and read what people have written. I think I made a few posts there about the exact same questions, so maybe doing a search with "digdug" as author will bring up what you are looking for.

Kenko extension tubes are lots of fun I've read. I haven't purchased them, though.

 

[JMWarren]

The 50mm would be decent with tubes. The problem you will have is the max of f/22 will restrict DOF.

 

[JMWarren]

Originally posted by: DigDug
The Tokina 12-24mm F4 is a *superb* lens with L-like quality. Do some reading up at FredMiranda.com. This is one of several lenses available by 3rd parties that the Lens gods somehow had shown down upon during design. The build quality is fantastic as well - far better than any comparably priced Canon lens (macro or not). After alot of researching and thinking, I ended up choosing this lens as it was the best balance of price and macro-width - it comes with a lens hood (necessary for macro lenses) which another $100 (if I recall correctly) investment should you go the Canon route.

Kenko extension tubes are lots of fun I've read. I haven't purchased them, though.

That is not a macro lense, it's a wide angle.

 

[jiwq]

buy that kit lens reverser thingy on ebay. lets you put on your lens backwards for macro shots.

 

[DigDug]

Woops. You are right - for some reason I'm reading macro and thinking wide angle.

For Macro, I'd go with Canon's 100mm macro. Or the 60mm ef-s.

The problem with shorter working distances is that moving objects will *quickly* jump out of your view. I think 100mm is a nice distance.

But generally speaking the fixed-length macro lenses from the various manufacturers are all great. Sigma makes a 300mm thats very, very good too. The engineering behind fixed-length lenses isn't complex.

The advantage of Canon's 100mm offering is internal focusing. No long tubes coming out of the lens that becomes unwieldy and may scare away little critters!

 

[Mrvile]

Alright here we go!

Recommended:

Sigma 50mm f/2.8 ~$200
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 ~$350
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 ~$550
Sigma 180mm f/3.5 ~$600
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 ~$450
Tokina 100mm f/2.8 ~$350
Canon 100mm f/2.8 ~$500
Canon 180mm f/3.5L ~$1200
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 ~$450

Those are really the only macro lenses I would buy (unless you wanted to go nuts and get the Canon 65mm f/2.8 5x magnification, but only if you're nuts). The only thing that really differentiates the lenses above is what you're looking for. Each has it's own minor pros and cons, but otherwise they're all very sharp and great lenses.

Looking to shoot bugs/reptiles/etc? Get the Sigma 150/180 or if you're very rich get the Canon 180 (the best macro lens ever). Looking to shoot flowers/other still objects? Get one of the 90/100/105 lenses, of those I'd recommend either the Sigma or the Canon...the Tamron is a tad on the huge side and the Tokina I don't really know much about yet. And unless you really need the 50 or the 60mm focal length, they aren't really necessary. I actually don't really recommend getting a short macro lens like a 50mm because it makes it hard to get good lighting and working distance is limited.

Of the lenses above I'd have to say the Sigma 150mm is the best bang for the buck. It has a 9.8 rating on FredMiranda, and with the critical reviewers they have on that site, a 9.8 rating is definately something to be proud of.

Finally, if you can't afford any of the lenses above your best bet is to get some extension tubes (the cheap Kenko set is the best, believe it or not) for your current lens. Focusing will probably be pretty bad, and the pictures won't be as sharp as a dedicated macro lens would produce, but it gives you the experience and allows you to take pictures you haven't been able to before.

Hope that helps. Good luck with your purchase.

Oh btw, what 100-300 lens do you have?

EDIT: Oh oops I didn't see you had a price range listed. For ~$500 I'd go for the Sigma 150. Can't be beat. I'll leave the extension tube info up for others though.

 

[Mrvile]

Originally posted by: DigDug
But generally speaking the fixed-length macro lenses from the various manufacturers are all great. Sigma makes a 300mm thats very, very good too. The engineering behind fixed-length lenses isn't complex.

Well, the Sigma 300mm lens isn't really a macro lens. It's magnification is 1:3 (which is a huge factor), it isn't EX, and still isn't as sharp as the lenses I listed. For that price I'd look somewhere else.

 

[ZOXXO]

Have you considered the 500D close up lens?

 

[Mrvile]

Damn, thread goes unread. Bump for those who want the info.

 

[SaigonK]

Originally posted by: Mrvile
Alright here we go!

Recommended:

Sigma 50mm f/2.8 ~$200
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 ~$350
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 ~$550
Sigma 180mm f/3.5 ~$600
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 ~$450
Tokina 100mm f/2.8 ~$350
Canon 100mm f/2.8 ~$500
Canon 180mm f/3.5L ~$1200
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 ~$450

Those are really the only macro lenses I would buy (unless you wanted to go nuts and get the Canon 65mm f/2.8 5x magnification, but only if you're nuts). The only thing that really differentiates the lenses above is what you're looking for. Each has it's own minor pros and cons, but otherwise they're all very sharp and great lenses.

Looking to shoot bugs/reptiles/etc? Get the Sigma 150/180 or if you're very rich get the Canon 180 (the best macro lens ever). Looking to shoot flowers/other still objects? Get one of the 90/100/105 lenses, of those I'd recommend either the Sigma or the Canon...the Tamron is a tad on the huge side and the Tokina I don't really know much about yet. And unless you really need the 50 or the 60mm focal length, they aren't really necessary. I actually don't really recommend getting a short macro lens like a 50mm because it makes it hard to get good lighting and working distance is limited.

Of the lenses above I'd have to say the Sigma 150mm is the best bang for the buck. It has a 9.8 rating on FredMiranda, and with the critical reviewers they have on that site, a 9.8 rating is definately something to be proud of.

Finally, if you can't afford any of the lenses above your best bet is to get some extension tubes (the cheap Kenko set is the best, believe it or not) for your current lens. Focusing will probably be pretty bad, and the pictures won't be as sharp as a dedicated macro lens would produce, but it gives you the experience and allows you to take pictures you haven't been able to before.

Hope that helps. Good luck with your purchase.

Oh btw, what 100-300 lens do you have?

EDIT: Oh oops I didn't see you had a price range listed. For ~$500 I'd go for the Sigma 150. Can't be beat. I'll leave the extension tube info up for others though.

I have the Canon 100-300 USM lens, not too bad, but not the greatest either. I think i am going to look at the Sigma 100mm or the Canon 100mm...going to go look at prices now...

 

[SaigonK]

Anyone care to comment on extension tubes?

 

[DurocShark]

Canon's 180mm Macro rocks, but is expensive. Extension tubes are the best because there are no optics to add possible flare or other flaws to the image.

Don't get anything smaller than a 100mm Macro though. The 50mm sucks because the subject is practically touching the lens and 1:1. Bleh.

On my MF gear I use bellows with a 100mm portrait lens. Outstanding images.

 

[littleprince]

I dunno how anyone can answer this thread...
What kinda working distance do you need? What are you planning to take photos of? How serious are you going to be about macro photography.

When you figure those out theres not gonna be that many choices left.

 

[Staples]

I decided to buy a point and shoot for wide and macro. Sure the Rebel XT can take better pictures with any decent lens but when I want a lens, I tend to want expensive ones. For $200 you can get a decent point and shoot and for $1000, you can get two EF lens that will do the same, only better.

 

[NascarFool]

I just recently sold my Canon 100mm macro lens. Unfortunately the Post Office managed to lose it in Brownsville Texas. Personally I think a Postal employee stole the lens because it arrived at the PO but never went anywhere after that. Thankfully I had insurance on the package. The 100mm macro is an awesome lens too.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro Autofocus Lens

I've heard good things about this lens but haven't actually tried it. Might have to add it to my arsenal at some point though.

 

[iamtrout]

Originally posted by: littleprince
I dunno how anyone can answer this thread...
What kinda working distance do you need? What are you planning to take photos of? How serious are you going to be about macro photography.

When you figure those out theres not gonna be that many choices left.

:thumbsup:

 

[novon]

I've got the Tokina 12-24 and it is a great wideangle lens as mentioned above,

But my favorite specialty lens has to be my Sigma 105mm macro - can't beat the contrast, build, and price.

check out link in sig for macro examples taken with this lens.

 

[SaigonK]

Well i went and bought the: Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro this morning...now to wait till it gets shipped here so I can try it out!

 

[Mrvile]

Originally posted by: SaigonK
Well i went and bought the: Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro this morning...now to wait till it gets shipped here so I can try it out!

Hey man, great purchase, you're gonna love it. Have fun!

One thing about extension tubes - they are only good if you have a good lens to use them with. Since the 100-300 is the lower Canon one, the extension tubes probably won't work that well.

EDIT: Oh snap, 9999 posts!

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: SaigonK
Well i went and bought the: Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro this morning...now to wait till it gets shipped here so I can try it out!

nice. i can't justify a macro lens now (can't really justify any of my camera equipment really, heh). But I was looking at the 60mm ef-s instead... cheaper, and gets close to the 100mm after the crop factor. I can deal w/ ef-s.. i'm not getting a new body anytime soon.. and if anything, it'd be a 20d.. heh

enjoy shooting!

 

[SaigonK]

Posted some macro shots in the OP, now I am on a hunt to take some pics.