Macro Lenses

[MattScott]

I'm in the market for an affordable Macro Lens, can anyone here school me on them?

I shoot a Nikon D7000.

 

[mountainpete]

What do you consider affordable?

I'm very happy with my Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX, but you're running between $700 and $900 depending on if you hit a sale. Very sharp lens.

Pete

 

[grntrdtaco]

try a 12mm or so extension tube before you toss a bunch of $$ at a new lens. the extension tube will turn any lens that you have into a macro and cost nearly nothing allowing you to try out macro photography for less than 20 bucks. you can find sets on ebay but all you really need is the 12mm one.

 

[Viggen]

Tubes and flipping a lens backwards will do it just the same...

 

[Pathfinder]

The Tamron 90mm f2.8 SP AF Di has been a great lens for years - B&H has it for $459.95 I sold mine for Nikon mount a few years ago.

Extension tubes and reversing rings are useful for folks who want to shoot macro on a strict budget, but anyone shooting macro very often will quickly tire of the severely limited range of focus with extension tubes or reversing rings... I do use extension tubes with my Tamron 180mm macro fairly often to get at greater than 1:1 life size.

Sigma makes a fine 105mm macro, and a 50mm f2.8 EX DG Macro for $369 at B&H.

Nikon makes a lovely 60mm AF-S Micro Nikkor f2.8G ED macro autofocus lens for about $550.

 

[Lost Canadian]

The Sigma 150mm 2.8 is a stunning lens and is worth every single penny if you can afford it. I sold mine last year for the more flexible/portrait friendly Nikon 105mm VR, which is a wonderful lens in its own right, but it isn't quite as nice as the Sigma was for macro work close to 1:1. Neither are "cheap," but both are relatively affordable when you consider them in terms of their IQ output and build, with both being every bit top quality pro lenses.

Here are a few sample images I took with each lens to give you an idea of their characteristics.

Sigma 150mm.

Nikon 105mm VR.