Help me spend £400 on a macro setup!

[Jonleeper]

I have had a think and rather than getting another camera body (see Canon 1d or 30d thread) I would be better off trying to get more out of what I have. Having seen a number of images on here I am severely tempted to get a macro lens and have a go at this. So here goes,

Looking in the February issue of Digital SLR Photography they rate lenses and I have also searched for realistic prices. Using e-bay "buy it now" prices (with postage added in) as the best price that I could expect I get the following;

Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM - £265 (highly rated on this forum)
Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG - £215
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG - £200
Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG IF HSM - £290 (winner of macro group test)
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di - £200

Having read through some of the threads I also looked for converters;

Canon 1.4 - £170
Canon 2.0 - £170
Sigma 1.4 - £95
Sigma 2.0 - £120

I also looked at flashes;

Canon MR 14EX - £270
Sigma EM140 DG - £180 (but often selling for @£105)

And finally the February issue of Digital Photo rated tripods and the winner looked like it would fit my requirement so;

Manfrotto 055XPROB + head @£200 (Magazine price)

So from within my budget I have a large number of options and would welcome any advice or opinion.

If I buy the Canon lens then I could get the Sigma flash (as long as it is compatible) or the Canon / Sigma 1.4 / 2.0 converter.

If I went for either the Sigma 70mm, Sigma 105mm or Tamron 90mm then I could add the tripod or the Sigma flash and the Sigma 1.4 converter.

If I go for the Sigma 150mm then I am in the same boat as the Canon!

If it helps I am using a Canon 10D with battery grip, Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di (which I still love many thanks LB) Canon 70-300mm f/4 - 5.6 IS USM, Jessops 360AFDC flash (not sure about this but I really needed it quickly for a wedding and had to buy).

Many thanks,

Jon

[ae111sr]

Just to rule out one of the options - the Sigma 1.4 converter will not fit the Sigma 105mm macro lens. The converter is very shallow and the rear element of the lens would foul the glass inside the 1.4. There's a compatibility chart here for Sigma lenses.

[Simpo Two]

I wouldn't have thought that a TC would be very essential. True macro lenses go to 1:1 (the size of a postage stamp) and at that setting the DOF is paper-thin, without strapping more glass on.

I'd try it without and see how you get on.

[Gemm]

ae111sr said:

Just to rule out one of the options - the Sigma 1.4 converter will not fit the Sigma 105mm macro lens. The converter is very shallow and the rear element of the lens would foul the glass inside the 1.4. There's a compatibility chart here for Sigma lenses.

Canon Extender won't fit Canon 100mm macro either. The only way to do it is to put an extension tube in between (12mm will do).

[RobDickinson]

What are you looking to shoot?

If its always insects & very close ups look at the MP-E 65. Limited in use but excelent.

[V6GTO]

From your list I'd go with the Tamron 90mm, the Manfrotto setup mentioned, and I'd also get a set of Jessops extension tubes for £70, Sorted!

Martin.

[Jonleeper]

RobDickinson said:

What are you looking to shoot?

If its always insects & very close ups look at the MP-E 65. Limited in use but excelent.

I did think about this but it can only focus very close so cannot be used for anything other than dedicated macro work, and its also my entire budget in one hit!

[Jonleeper]

Simpo Two said:

I wouldn't have thought that a TC would be very essential. True macro lenses go to 1:1 (the size of a postage stamp) and at that setting the DOF is paper-thin, without strapping more glass on.

I'd try it without and see how you get on.

The question is, I guess, which one? The Canon 100mm is well recomended in other threads on here and the Sigma 150mm won the macro test but both are more expensive than the shorter Sigma and the Tamron. As I will be trying out macro, I am really impressed with the results others are posting, I would also like the fallback of using the lens as an ordinary prime, probably for portrait type work. (Many have said that these lenses lend themselves to this as well as true macro)

That said would I be better opting for the Sigma 70mm or the longer 105mm or the Tamron 90mm that sits between the two? The Canon is not out of this range, 100mm, but would the Sigma 150mm be to long to use easilly for anything other than true macro? Also if I do want to take close-ups of bugs and wildlife would I be better off with a flash unit and hand-held or no flash and a tripod?

[Simpo Two]

Jonleeper said:

The question is, I guess, which one? The Canon 100mm is well recomended in other threads on here and the Sigma 150mm won the macro test but both are more expensive than the shorter Sigma and the Tamron. As I will be trying out macro, I am really impressed with the results others are posting, I would also like the fallback of using the lens as an ordinary prime, probably for portrait type work. (Many have said that these lenses lend themselves to this as well as true macro)

That said would I be better opting for the Sigma 70mm or the longer 105mm or the Tamron 90mm that sits between the two? The Canon is not out of this range, 100mm, but would the Sigma 150mm be to long to use easilly for anything other than true macro? Also if I do want to take close-ups of bugs and wildlife would I be better off with a flash unit and hand-held or no flash and a tripod?

All macro lenses will give you same magnification at the close-up end (1:1), the main difference is working distance - the longer the lens, the further back you have to be. On a sunny day you could shoot bugs without flash or tripod, unless DOF is really an issue.

As for portraits, my studio is small (OK it's a converted bedroom, 12 x 10') and I find that 60-70mm gives about the right working distance for people (I have to go wider for full length).

So if you want to do critters you might find that a longer working distance is helpful as they're less likely to fly away, but if you want to do people in a smallish room then 105/150 would be too long.

AF-S (SWM?) is nice to have so that would also away my choice.