I own a D300 camera, quite old but it works.

I haven’t used it for ages though and I think I might fancy trying macro photography a go. I don’t know much in the way of macro lenses however, so I am wandering if this one is a good starter?

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/82003/show.html

I’d probably look on eBay also, I’d say my budget is about 250 max but that’s quite an arbitrary figure.

Thanks

This article might provide some insight:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/best-macro-lenses.htm

Here’s another approach that I took…get a proper macro lens, but an older manual focus version, just to see if you really need one. I bought an old Sigma 60mm macro off ebay that could focus down to about 5cm from the front objective. I would just leave it at the minimum focus distance, and move back or forth until the image was in focus. I got some amazing results. I did that for about a year and then sold it for the same amount again on eBay.

I then bought another Sigma, this time a 28mm f1.8 EX DG which has quite a good macro focus option. This is my only lens, and does OK as an alrounder (with a DX body) but the macro comes in real handy for flowers/insects etc..

To be honest, I wouldn’t be too sure what to buy as a dedicated macro lens as I don’t think there has ever been a good range of prices for decent items to choose from. I remember nearly splashing out on a Nikon 105mm f/2.8 G VR and that’s probably still the best, so maybe try and get one of those second hand. I just checked on eBay, and those seem to sell for over £400, so might be outside your range.

So not too sure….good luck.

Tamron 90mm macro. All the lens you could possibly need and fantastic value…

I got a Tamron 90mm macro from OneStopDigital.

It’s a great lens. It was that, or the equivalent Sigma. I seem to remember that most of the reviews reckon the Tamron is a bit sharper.

Consider what focal length you want. The 40mm you link too would have been too wide for me.

Here’s some pics:

[url=https://flic.kr/p/kLKRM8]13-11-06 DSC_8290[/url] by STW stumpy01, on Flickr

[url=https://flic.kr/p/kLMUVh]13-11-01 DSC_8239[/url] by STW stumpy01, on Flickr

[url=https://flic.kr/p/krdASU]13-10-11 DSC_8148[/url] by STW stumpy01, on Flickr

[url=https://flic.kr/p/ezVQKC]13-05-05 DSC_5185[/url] by STW stumpy01, on Flickr

+1 Tamron Di 90 Macro

As for Ken. He’s got some great articles, but his opinions at times are balls…

“Sigma and Tamron

I wouldn’t buy either of these brands. Even if the optics can be as good as the others, the mechanical quality of the samples I’ve seen has not been up to my standards, and there is far more potential for the lenses you buy today not to work on the cameras you buy tomorrow with these brands than with camera-maker-brand lenses.”

Yeah, balls. Okay, the Tamron is a cheap option and maybe not stellar compared to a top of the range Nikon, but still bloody good for the money. Only real downside is auto focus hunts a lot. Manual is easier though need good stable mount.

The Tamron also makes quite a nice 90mm prime lens.

It’s also a full frame lens, whereas the “camera-maker-brand lenses” Ken talks about could be Nikon DX and then you’re stuck with a useless DX lens if you go for a full frame camera and/or DX gets obsoleted.

DiscJockey – Member
This article might provide some insight:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/best-macro-lenses.htm

Didn’t realise people still listened to Ken Rockwell…..
Seems he dislikes the companies without a large marketing budget to afford favourable reviews….

Cheers, Steve

Another Tamron 90 mm here. Great lens.

I have an old manual Nikon 55mm which is very nice too .

Worth looking to see if you have an existing lens that could have an extension tube added to create Macro shots too.