Why a Macro Lens?
I first learned about macro photography when I was attending a basic photography course at a local junior college. The instructor came to class one night with some butterfly pictures that he had taken with his 50mm macro. From that point on I knew I had to have a macro lens. That experience led me to purchase my first macro lens, a used EOS EF50mm/2.5 macro. Later I added a used EOS life-size converter. My favorite macro subject is butterflies. With that 50mm I soon realized that I needed more focal length. I started dreaming about an EF 180mm macro, but I couldn’t justify spending the money for one. Instead, I opted for a Tamron 90mm/2.8 SP and later a Sigma EX 105mm/2.8. But the urge for more working distance would never go away. Why the Sigma 180mm/EX? The Canon EF 180 is a great lens I’ve heard, but at $1400US, I just couldn’t justify it. When Sigma introduced their new 180mm/3.5 EX HSM macro with a street price of $800US, I thought that this was a lens that I could afford. The Sig
Related Questions
- When I use Tamrons 90mm macro lens as well as some other lenses, the open aperture value displayed on the camera is smaller than designated on the lens. Is my lens defective?
- Is there a difference between the designation MACRO on a 90mm macro lens and a zoom lens?
- Does anyone have a suggestion on a good macro lens for the Nikon?
