My favorite photographic subjects are: close-up/macro, wildlife and people.
For people and wildlife I use Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 LD XR lens, whereas, for close-up/macro, I use the same lens coupled with extension tubes. I also have Canon 18-55mm (kit lens) and 50mm f/1.8 standard lens.
The combination of the Tamron lens and the extension tubes is fine, and can allow for an excellent working distance (especially at 300mm focal length).
First I considered buying a fast telezoom, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 for people and wildlife photography. I can get it for a reduced price: $737 only (B&H price is $839). However, I changed my mind and thought that it's a good idea to invest in the canon macro lens and start saving for a better fast telelens, probably the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS or Sigma 300mm f/2.8.
Yesterday, I went to the Canon distributor to check the price of the macro lens and I was shocked to know it's $285 more than B&H price!!!! It's $735. Therefore, I have decided to go back to the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 lens :) and stick to my extension tubes for a while. I may order the Canon 100mm macro lens over the internet and save more than $200. what do you think?
Thank you again for your helpful reply :) Regards, Ned ------------ That was what i typed yesterday (Monday 4 July 2005) but couldn't post. Now, the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 is in my backpack with a Sigma MultiCoated UV and a 2X Apo teleconverter :) The whole lot cost me $930. It's a pity that the teleconverter is compatible with that lens, only, and i can't use it with the other lenses!
First of all, you dont get a bad macro lens, only macro lenses yoth different degrees of perfection. If you are considdering buying a macro lense, then you must be someone who wants the best photo quality when it comes to macros. Otherwise you would just get a normal lens and screw a close-up filter to it, or get a lens that can focus on close objects (typically 1:3 life-size). Then, if you get a macro lens, you might as well do the job properly and get the best one readily available (preferably the best value for money - with the emphasis on value). Anyway, that was the chain of reasoning I went through, and havent been sorry.
As far as the lens goes, its great - superbly sharp and high quality (what else could I say). There are other very good cheaper options (particularly Sigma lenses of similar size), but my belief is that you get what you pay for in terms of perfection in optic quality and build quality with this one. Also its a Canon lens - the name is also worth a lot if you want to sell it again in the future. But then you probably won't want to sell it again - its the type of lens that will always be better than you are, and better than the competitors (other than the Canon 180mm L, and a couple of others that cost an arm and two legs).
Next, its a prime which generally gives it a small edge over a zoom in terms of optic quality and background blur. For macro work, you really don't need a zoom, because you simply move closer or further away to "zoom" and frame better.
Also the focussing is very quick, and it has a ring type autofocus - which is supurb for object further away, but with true macro work, its easier, quicker, and faster to manually focus - and again move closer or further away.
The closest comparison I can make to this lens is the Tamron 90mm which is a bit cheaper, very similar in optic quality, but not the same in build quality - its another lens that would stay with you for a long time.
My final word (with my sales cap on ;-))is that I have baught cheap lenses in the past, and have regretted it about 6 months later when I outgrew it and it didn't match my expectations - and will probably replace it soon. Currently I tend to try to spend a bit more for a lens that I would be able to keep for much longer.
Sorry for the dissertation - I am clearly passionate about my macro lens... ;-)
OMG Bryan I didn't think you could get any closer this is magnificent the contrast between the brown and the yellow is superb. You must have used a tripod the focus is rock steady. This is a very exciting shot, well done. 7/7
0 
{K:23722} 6/28/2005
