Nikon 105mm f/2.8 vr or 200mm f/4 for macro

[Mimoore54]

Is there a better Canon lens than the Nikons mentioned that I could buy if I wanted to do some basic macro work. Shooting insects and close-ups of nature, etc?

[Loupey]

Please define what you mean by "better".

Cheaper? Sharper? Color rendition? Weight? Size? ...

I can tell you that Canon doesn't have a VR (IS) enabled macro lens - yet. To me, that would be a huge draw. In fact, I came this close to buying a Nikon D90 just so I could use it with that lens.

[gryphonslair99]

I would qualify the 100mm f2.8 Macro and the 180mm f3.5L on par with either of the Nikon lenses you mentioned.

[customminds]

would you consider the 65mm mpe from canon?

[Loupey]

would you consider the 65mm mpe from canon?

This is a highly specialized lens and one that requires considerable skill/experience to master. It starts at 1x (lifesize) and goes up to 5x. I don't know too many subjects that require that much magnification. I know even fewer subjects that will let you get close enough for a 5x mug shot (live ones anyway).

Purely a studio lens. Even the slightest breeze outdoors would make this lens nearly impossible to use outside unless one likes to photograph grains of sand.

[WesternGuy]

The MPE 65mm from Canon would be okay, but it is only a manual focus lens. If that doesn't worry you, then it would be okay. I just recently purchased the 180 mm f3.5L macro and it is giving some good images and a new learning curve(!)...HTH.

Cheers,

WesternGuy