First, the big question: how macro do you need to go? Do you want pictures of in which something like a dinner plate fills the frame (1:7), an apple fills the frame (1:2), one teaspoon fills the frame (1:1), one raspberry fills the frame (2:1), one peppercorn fills the frame (5:1)?
Reversing rings are generally better for high-magnification macro (1:1 or greater). Depending on the lens you reverse, you may not even be able to get low magnification macro at all. With a reversing ring, you'll also need extension tubes or bellows if you want to control the field of view or magnification (the focus ring of the lens often does nothing if the lens is reversed). And anything above 1:1 will probably need extension tubes or bellows although you might get lucky and find that a wide angle lens you already own produces high-magnification macro if reversed.
For macro up to 1:1, I'd pick a macro lens such as others have mentioned. Whether you go with the 50 or the 100 or something in between depends on the kind of perspective you want. The 50, being wider than the 100 will show more front-to-back variation in magnification and show more background objects in perspective than the 100. It's a stylistic decision so you might want to look around Flickr or some other site at food photos and see if have an opinion. If you don't need/want the "wide angle look", then go with the 100 because it provides more working distance for getting lighting around the subject. Moreover, some people like using the 100 for portraits, so that makes the lens more useful.
Good luck!
Last edited by photoptimist; 03-03-2017 at 08:15 AM.
Reason: typo
Originally posted by eaglem 
Post #7 by photoptimist
Similar Threads 
