Macro Lens

[snowflake1996]

I am looking at getting a Macro lens and am not sure which one to get. I am going to use it mostly for flowers, but would also use for portraits (a little). I have looked at the Tokina 100mm, Tamron 90mm. I want to look at the Canon 100mm, but is has been backordered for a while. Any suggestions on these lens'? Thanks for any help I can get!

So I think I am going with the Tamron. I talked with a local shop and he thought it had better images than the Canon and a little less money. Thanks for the responses.

[Paradox]

Have a look at the Sigma 105mm as well while you're at it.

[TheWengler]

Don't forget the Canon 60mm f/2.8. Should be nice for flowers and portraits. It's probably too short for bugs though. It also won't work on FF bodies.

[Rhys]

Try to avoid getting one-size-fits-all solutions. At best they're a terrible compromise.

I looked at the 50mm Sigma macro, thinking one-size-fits-all but its focussing is slow and inaccurate - not good enough for portraits. For macro it might be better but then most macro seems to be manually focussed anyway.

The 100mm macro is very popular and much more convenient than the longer macros. The Canon half macro looks interesting but again - it's a compromise that does nothing very well.

The Canon 50mm f1.8 was (in my experience) not that great so if I were after a portrait lens then I'd probably go for a 50mm f1.4.

Two rules will stand you in pretty good stead - USM - if the lens doesn't have this, it could be a disappointing lens. IS - if the lens doesn't have this, it could be disappointing also.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

I love my Tamron 90mm, for me it's a good compromise length for both bugs and flowers. It's capable of better shots than I can take.

Whilst I'd like a Nikon with stabilisation, I'm happy with the Tamron at half the price. I've heard other positive comments about the Sigma.

Have you looked through the picture gallery threads here (flowers and bugs).