Requesting help with selection of macro lens

[jefstathiou]

I am ready ( I think ) to try my hand at Macro photography. I am looking at a canon 100 mm 2.8 and am hoping to learn if the IS feature is worth the large price difference. I would also appreciate any thoughts on the many non canon lenses that are available. In other words are their other lenses on the market are worth considering with a lower price.
I would greatly appreciate your thoughts and opinions.

 

[Paul C.]

Following along John. I just rented a 105 mm for my Nikon. Need some pointers...

 

[Norberg]

I am very pleased with the Sigma macro lenses, i have a 70mm 2.8 that does a great job. Lenses can be pricy and if you buy Nikon or Canon you get great lenses but they do cost alot.
If you want to try serius macro photo, buy à used Sigma in good condition. The money you saved you can use to buy a stand, remote controle and à good software (Lightroom or Aperture) if you dont have that.
I have a friend that use Canon 7D and a 100mm 2.8 and i give him a faire match with my Nikon D90 and Sigma 70mm 2.8 when it comes to take pictures in our tanks.

This pictur is taken with my Sigma. https://www.reef2reef.com/forums/zo...chhiker-zoanthid-coral-palys.html#post1225315

 

[returnofsid]

IMO, the Canon 100mm Macro is the best macro lens made. It's also an excellent portraiture lens. NO, the IS L version is not worth the extra money. In fact, when shooting Macro, the IS isn't needed anyway. Find an old school Canon 100mm Macro and you're good to go!