fast zoom with macro?

Hi,
I have a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 lens which I like.
I'd like a macro lens and one solution could be a fast zoom lens with proper macro capabilities (1:2 minimum, 1:1 would be stunning).
Are there any lenses similar to mine that have a good macro in them?
I did a bit of searching (sigma 24-70 f2.8 macro) but for some when it says macro it's really 1:3.8...

Cheers,
Pa.

I was going to say that most zoom lenses only do macro as a compromise and you'd be better off with a dedicated macro lens but all three of Charlotte's shots are stunning. While admittedly they are not true macro (1:1) for that type of subject the results are first rate.
It would be interesting to see the exif data as the depth of field achieved is impressive. Well done.

The current Pentax 100mm macro is a fine lens for macro and there are earlier AF varieties that come up second hand. In the budget department are the old manual focus macro lenses from Tamron and Vivitar which are also good. Given that autofocus doesn't always work well with macro subjects a dedicated MF lens is worth considering.

John

The last one's exif;

K-r
Sigma DG 70-300mm switched to macro
Camera Mode Manual exposure
Lens Manual focus
16 on the ap ring on the camera.
ISO 400
1/160
I can't remember what the other ones were and as it's done in manual the data doesn't appear on the photo.

I quite agree that there is no comparison with a proper macro lens - I couldn't afford more than one lens when I started out and this was a compromise and I really wanted a macro.

If I had the money I'd buy the Pentax 100mm macro but can't justify paying more for a lens than I did for my camera.

I have a vivitar 55mm manual macro and a sigma 50mm manual macro both obviously knock spots off the macro facility on the sigma zoom. The sigma macro's come up frequently second hand and aren't all that expensive, I think I paid £40.00 for mine.

If I had, had the knowledge that I have now when I first started I would have got a pentax 55-300mm zoom and a manual macro instead of the sigma zoom. Although having said that I wouldn't part with my sigma zoom because that lens taught me how to take photographs.

Kind regards
Charlotte

I agree with the various comments above. I think if you are looking for a zoom which covers the focal range approximating to a 'kit' lens (like you have already), then you could look at the sigma 17-70 macro although again this is not 1:1... , and may not offer a great deal beyond your current lens (you would have to check) - I think the pentax 17-70 focusses pretty close (as in fairness do most lenses of this focal range). If you want a lens to complement your existing lens at a longer focal length, but with a 'macro' capability then I think Charlotte's suggestion is a good one - certainly great value for money and a decent performer too, and with the bonus of actually being a 70-300mm lens, albeit not devastatingly fast. You could also look at similar offerings - I think sigma advertise the 70-200 f2.8 as 'macro' (not 1:1 I don't think).

Alternatively you could look at a 'true' macro lens, they will tend to be 'faster' I think and have the 1:1 potential - the DFA100 is great, as is the DA35 (I have both and love them). and there are offerings to be had at 50mm, 70mm, 90mm, 105mm and longer if you are prepared to hunt around on ebay

Finally, you could try using an extension tube with your current lens. If you have a manual aperture ring then this might be a very cheap option ('dumb' extension tubes can be picked up for a fiver or so I think)... if you need to control the aperture from the body then you would need a tube with the relevant contacts, which are harder to find and more expensive

Decisions decisions...

Regards

I have a couple of Tamron Adaptall 2 lenses that have decent close up capabilities. The 70-210mm f3.5 and 35-80mm f2.8/3.8 are both 1:2.5 or 1:1.25 with the Adaptall 2x converter.

Both are manual focus but fun to use and give pretty good results.



Shield Beetle by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr



Iguana by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr

Think I even have a spare of the 35-80mm somewhere.

There's the raynox options too.

And a reasonably priced 1:1 macro in the classifieds, you could always make the seller an offer

the 90mm manual focus? i've noted that...cheers

link

And this one was taken thro' a rather tatty and fungusy Tamron 80-210mm (the slightly inferior version) adaptall 2 lens on macro setting. Range about 30 inches.

You won't get shots like this with a zoom with a macro setting though;

Charlotte, which one was that with?

(and more importantly how? ring flash or diffuser?)

Well that's pretty obvious.

I believe the original question was about maro with a zoom lens though.

I'll send you a pm Doug,
I don't want to upset people by taking the thread off topic.

Thanks Charlotte. Given that quality I think a dedicated macro lens is the way to go. I'm sure MikepP won't mind. He might be worried he'll miss out on a sale.

I had a Tamron 70-300mm for a few days and tried the macro setting. It was pretty good and you could use it from 180mm to 300mm. The distance to subject was really good. I preferred the results I got using it as a macro to those as a tele zoom. However you have demonstrated that stalkers get success with shorter close lenses.

I'd say the problem is that the longer zooms provide best macro ability. Short zooms have smaller magnification. So the convenience of a single lens that does decent macro as well.as being a good "always" on doesn't really exist.

If you want 1:2 you will need a dedicated lens or as Mat says above extension tubes.

Or some sort of suplimentary diopter in front of the lens (Raynox/stacked prime etc...) or a teleconverter (as per Peter Bargh's recent article).

[Is a teleconverter considered to be a diopter?]