Macro lenses for Canon

[chirurgeon]

I am looking forward to getting the new 60D (my 5 yr cancer cure present as soon as I get the official work form my oncologist) I wanted a macro lens to go with probably the kit lens they are selling. I do not NEED a Canon lens. I have have prior good experience with Tamron when I had a film SLR (quite a while ago) So any opinions? I don't have a fortune to spend on this.

TIA,
Kim

 

[ukcatfan]

No advice, but CONGRATULATIONS!!!

 

[Anewman]

Congrats... And yes Tamron and Sigma do have some very good lenses.

 

[VVFF]

You have a number of options and pretty much all are good...it comes down to a couple things:

1. What subjects do you plan to shoot with the lens?
2. How much is "a fortune"?

Canon 100mm F2.8 Macro is a very good lens, I have the L version as I appreciated the IS feature.

The 60mm is also well regarded if you don't need lots of working distance.

I've used the Sigma 105mm F2.8 and it was a nice lens but its focusing was much slower than the Canon's.

There are other options from Tokina and Tamron but I haven't used them to provide feedback to you.

 

[chirurgeon]

1. What subjects do you plan to shoot with the lens?

I was planning on close flora and fauna

2. How much is "a fortune"?

A "fortune" is over $500

 

[mom2rtk]

I was planning on close flora and fauna

Hey........ don't forget Merryweather! She's my favorite!

Sorry...... couldn't resist........

CONGRATULATIONS on the milestone!

 

[chirurgeon]

Hey........ don't forget Merryweather! She's my favorite!

Sorry...... couldn't resist........

CONGRATULATIONS on the milestone!

LOL Thank you and everyone else for the congratulations. Its been a long 5 years.

Kim

 

[C&B Young]

Congratulations! I cannot recommend the Canon 100mm Macro lens highly enough, I LOVE that lens! Great for macro and non-macro subjects alike. It's over your $500 limit new, but you should be able to pick up a used one for less.

 

[photo_chick]

I second the "non-L" 100mm f/2.8 macro. The ultrasonic version is under $500 used from KEH. The older, non ultrasonic version is around $300 used there. Not that the L series isn't awesome but it's pricey especially if you're not shooting for money.

 

[Finally08]

Congratulations! I cannot recommend the Canon 100mm Macro lens highly enough, I LOVE that lens! Great for macro and non-macro subjects alike. It's over your $500 limit new, but you should be able to pick up a used one for less.

Yep, ditto this.

And congratulations! I hope we can celebrate the same someday - dh has been battling on and off for 6 1/2 years now.

 

[VVFF]

OP,

given what you want to shoot I would recommend the Canon 100mm macro F2.8, Canon EF-s 60mm F2.8, or sigma 105mm F2.8 Macro.

The first two have USM which will make focusing fast. All are sharp. The 60mm will be easier to use as a portrait lens should you want to have a fast, sharp lens with nice bokeh. The other two will also be good but the focal length will be quite a bit harder to deal with for normal subjects.

The 100mm and 105mm will allow you to stay further from your subject and allow for easier isolation(this isn't ALWAYS good though as you'll find the longer the focal length the harder it may to get everything you want in focus.)

Another option would be using close up lenses/extension tubes. These allow you to get a bit closer to your subject and would be more than adequate for flower subjects. They simply aren't THAT small and usually don't take a 1:1 macro to get a shot of. This is by far the cheaper route and could be good depending on how invested you want to get in macro photography.

 

[bob100]

I am looking forward to getting the new 60D (my 5 yr cancer cure present as soon as I get the official work form my oncologist) I wanted a macro lens to go with probably the kit lens they are selling. I do not NEED a Canon lens. I have have prior good experience with Tamron when I had a film SLR (quite a while ago) So any opinions? I don't have a fortune to spend on this.

Depends on your budget.
You can get a nice used Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro for $250 (Non Di) or you can get a new Canon 100mm 2.8 IS macro or MP-E 65mm macro for $1,000
And there are a lot choices in-between !
edit: I see your limit is $500 - Look at:
Tamron 90mm macro
used Canon 100mm
new Canon 60mm or new Tamron 60mm macro

 

[alloyd1170]

Another vote for the Canon 100 2.8 non-L lens. Love it except for when I want to get in closer to the subject. IS isn't as big a deal on this lens for me because when shooting macro, I usually want want to use a tripod.