I have an EOS 300 with a EF 28-90 lens and would like a macro accessory to take some close-up shots (bugs etc). Do I have to buy a whole new macro lens or can I buy something to put on the end of my 28-90 lens. How do the two accessories generally compare in price and what do you recommend (brands, models etc)?

Thanks

-- Jodi (dalle777@yahoo.com), June 01, 2002

Answers

The best way to do this is to buy a true macro lens. Most lenses these days have "MACRO" marked on them, but aren't true macro lenses because they can't achieve a 1:1 magnification. 1:1 means that the lens can image something the same size as the film area itself. (ie: something 24x36mm in size for 35mm film)

Unfortunately true macro lenses are pretty expensive. Canon sell three in three focal lengths - 50mm, 100mm and 180mm. Tamron have a fairly well regarded 90mm as well.

If you're a beginner you probably don't want to spend more than 2 to 3x what you spent on your camera on a lens. So you could add an accessory to allow your 28-90 lens to focus more closely. These come in two forms - add on lenses (often called closeup filters) and extension tubes which fit between the camera body and the lens.

These are cheaper - particularly extension tubes - but have their drawbacks as well. Closeup filters often are of poor quality unless they have two elements (ie: two pieces of glass not one). Extension tubes reduce the amount of light entering the camera and so you may need longer shutter speeds or artificial illumination.

For more information on macro photography in general have a look at:

http://www.photo.net/macro/primer

-- NK Guy (tela@tela.bc.ca), June 01, 2002.

You might want to look into the Vivitar/Cosina/Phoenix 100mm f/3.5 macro. It only cost about $140-150 and is a pretty good lens for the money. These lenses are sold under the Vivitar, Cosina, and Phoenix brands but they are basically the same lens. I have the Phoenix one. It's light-weight, has a noisy focus motor, and feels a bit cheap, but optically it's pretty good, it has a metal lens mount, does 1:2 lifesize by itself and 1:1 macro with the included lifesize converter lens. It will give you better results than your 28-90 zoom with macro attachments.

http://www01.bhphotovideo.com/default.sph/FrameWork.class? FNC=ProductActivator__Aproductlist_html___186018___PH10035MCAF___REG_ __CatID=0___SID=EE67CE91D00___call=acc#goto_accessories

-- Peter Phan (pphan01@hotmail.com), June 02, 2002.

'True' macro lenses also offer a flatter depth of field than regular lenses so it's more than minimum focus distance that you get for the money. Important if you're taking a picture of something that's reasonably flat & taking up the whole frame, but probably not too important for bugs and other critters.

-- Steven Fisher (steven_fisher@hotmail.com), June 04, 2002.

Hello Jodi, I used a Cokin close-up filter (+3) for some time until I did have enough money to buy me a real macro lens (the Canon 100 f2.8 USM Macro). The results obtained with the Cokin filter were not really good: the middle of the picture was (more or less) sharp. But on the edges it was terrible: everything on the sides was ugly distorted and out of focus. Now with the "true" macro lens everything is sharp. Besides that I fell in love with the lens, not only for the macro-work, but it's a very good all-round lens that you will use more then you think. I know it's expensive, but you get what you pay for.

-- David Chiaradia (ered_lithui@hotmail.com), June 05, 2002.