# Have you tried Macro with Tamron 18-270mm



## PhotonJunkie (Sep 29, 2009)

The reproduction ratio of the Tamron 18-270mm is ~ 1:3.
 Has anyone tried or can suggest a better way to try macro with this lens eg reversing, teleconverters, tubes or coupling with the 50mm??
I'm looking for an economical setup for mainly insect macro shots.
Thanks


----------



## Canosonic (Sep 29, 2009)

I use my Sigma 70-300 1:2 Macro lens (it's just labeled a macro lens, actually it isn't. Macro is 1:1) and the results are........well........ acceptable. A superzoom (quality conscious  photographers don't usually use them) won't preform better. Macroing with the fifty will give better results. (extension tubes)


----------



## PhotonJunkie (Sep 29, 2009)

Thanks Canonsonic, my rational side is saying go for the extension tubes but I really like the idea of reversing the lens (would have to check if the correct size adapter is available) and getting magnification out of the inverted wide angel component of the zoom. 
Or would I be wasting my time.


----------



## tulla4122 (Sep 29, 2009)

Curious to know how you like this lens.  I have considered seriously purchasing that lens.


----------



## tulla4122 (Sep 29, 2009)

I would love to see some pics taken with the 18-270


----------



## PhotonJunkie (Sep 30, 2009)

I'm really enjoying the lens- with the big range it gives lots of composition choice and to my eye sharp images even hand held (using the vibration control).
I will post some pics when I get home in a couple of days so check back then.


----------



## Canosonic (Oct 2, 2009)

It might be off topic, but: "The majority of photos can are done between 24mm and 200mm. Although a single lens can span that range, quality consious photographers choose to own two: one for 24-70 and another for 70-200."
A passage from a photography magazine.


----------



## NateS (Oct 2, 2009)

Canosonic said:


> I use my Sigma 70-300 1:2 Macro lens (it's just labeled a macro lens, actually it isn't. Macro is 1:1) and the results are........well........ acceptable. A superzoom (quality conscious  photographers don't usually use them) won't preform better. Macroing with the fifty will give better results. (extension tubes)



Is yours the APO?....because my 70-300 APO produces results that are much better than merely "acceptable".


----------



## Canosonic (Oct 3, 2009)

NateS said:


> Canosonic said:
> 
> 
> > I use my Sigma 70-300 1:2 Macro lens (it's just labeled a macro lens, actually it isn't. Macro is 1:1) and the results are........well........ acceptable. A superzoom (quality conscious  photographers don't usually use them) won't preform better. Macroing with the fifty will give better results. (extension tubes)
> ...



Nope. No APO. Back then I didn't believe that I would go so far into photography. Soon I'll just go in for a canon 70-200 L!


----------



## DennyCrane (Oct 3, 2009)

I've gotten some very good macros with just a 55-250 telephoto. The downside is you're a minimum of 4' away... but it works for me. I'd bet that Tamron would be fine unless you need to see down to the molecular level.


----------



## NateWagner (Oct 3, 2009)

Also, just as an FYI the tubes won't be particularly effective with a longer lens like that. I'm not sure of the exact reasons why (I believe it has to do with focal length from the sensor) but primes are generally most affected by tubes, particularly shorter primes such as 35mm or 28mm. I use a 50 + Tubes for ringshots and the like, and it works quite well. With my longer zoom though the tubes don't make nearly as much of an impact.


----------



## PhotonJunkie (Oct 9, 2009)

These are with the 18-270mm attached to a lens reversing adaptor. At 270mm- will need a lot of practise to light and focus but for a $12 adaptor on ebay I am pretty happy with the potential. 













Sorry about the delay tulla4122 I have been away from the computer. This review link has some sample shots done in a more useful context than I can manage (Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC Lens Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review).


----------



## PhotonJunkie (Oct 9, 2009)

I agree NateWagner, the tubes aren't that satisfying. The lens reversing adaptor has given me better results so far. I will keep experimenting.


----------

