Jump to content

What is the best macro lens?


Recommended Posts

<p>I have just upgraded to an EOS5D<br>

I was using a TAMRON 90mm 1:1 macro lens with my EOS 20D<br>

On buying the new camera i asked for a lens which would enable me to take photos of even small things, closer up than the TAMRON<br>

I was sold a CANON 100m 1:2.8 and told that it would be more powerful than the TAMRON and is also 1:1<br>

WHAT lens do I really need? What wil; allow me to get even closer to tinier objects and focus in on them?<br>

Any advice greatly appreciated<br>

Anita</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should have posted it in Canon EOS forum.

 

Both the Tamron & Canon lenses listed have the same magnification power. Do not know how the Canon lens would be more powerful in comparison. Mind that being closer does not always translate to increase in magnification.

 

If you want more magnification from a lens, try Canon MP-E 65 mm f/2.8 1x-5x macro lens (magnification range is from 1x to 5x).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>OK, so Ive just had a look at bellows online.. HUGE! The photos I am taking are hand held whilst out and about and Im lucky that I have a very steady hand. So the bellows looks a bit cumbersome and heavy.<br>

So is the answer that there is NO lens which would take me closer in when using the 5D?</p><div>00awLF-500163784.jpg.99c5e019669354cd1da9b98f9d5561de.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>First thing first: John Shaw has a wonderful book on macro photography that explains a lot of this stuff, and methods for getting very very close, like you do. I would strongly suggest reading up...macro is a complicated subject. The name of the book is "Closeups in Nature". You can buy a used copy on Amazon for less than one dollar.</p>

<p>Both the Canon and Tamron lenses provide 1:1 magnification. What this means is that the maximum size of the captured subject is the size of the image sensor itself. When you switched from the 20D to the 5D you also switched to a larger sensor. For instance, on the 5D, 1:1 means that you can focus on an object that is 36mm x 24mm in size, because that is the size of the sensor. On your 20D, you could focus on an object that was about 22mm x 15mm because the sensor is smaller. </p>

<p>If you want to get closer, things get complicated very quickly. As far as I know, there is only one lens that will focus closer without using something like a bellows. It is the Canon MP-E 65mm lens. It is $1000 lens and it will ONLY focus at super macro objects, which means you can't use it for anything other than highly specialized macro photography. I do not recommend it for what you want. </p>

<p>I would recommend what Larry does, which is to try using an extension tube or closeup filter on your macro lens. But be warned! Trying to do this sort of thing without a tripod quickly becomes almost impossible, no matter how steady your hands are!</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Few lenses go closer without extensions, etc., than the 1:1 that your Tamron is capable of. A longer focal length lens will not go closer, but allows you to be farther away when working at 1:1</p>

<p>Keep your Tamron until you know what you are doing and then what you need, if anything more, will become clearer to you.</p>

<p>Any decent book on macro photography will be good, and under the learning tab at the top of the page there is a decent start ( http://www.photo.net/learn/macro/ ). A Google™ will reveal many more tutorials and information. I would suspect that YouTube will have something. ;)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thank you lovely helpful men.. that has given me a lot of answers. <br>

I just had another conversation with someone and their answer was that it's not the wrong lens I have been sold..but the wrong camera! That a 5D is better for landscapes and portraits and I would be better off with a 60D, which would give me better results for macro?<br>

Or... if The 5D has so many more pixels will I get the same ability to get closer by cropping the photo down?<br>

What do you think?<br>

As I said, I'm an artist as opposed to a professional photographer and being female, tend to run around taking pictures rather than spending time setting up for shots. ( and I'm incapable of reading an instruction manual too..it's much easier to ask lovely people like you)<br>

I think I may give back the 70-300mm lens they sold me, which feels a bit redundant and swap it for the extension tube. The MP-E 65mm I think may inhibit the hand held side of things and inhibit the spontaneity of grasping a shot which lasts for a moment. Like seeds taking off on the breeze</p>

<div>00awNG-500175584.jpg.b988d0e4e241e5d72d89a2b97cc76e85.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>No, you do not have the wrong camera. It will work fine. People shot plenty of Macro shots with MUCH less pixels than you have now. Macro is NOT all about pixel count and sensor size. It's about being large magnification and a very steady platform and very careful positioning of your camera.</p>

<p>You need to understand. To get any closer than what you are getting, you MUST use a tripod and other devices, like extension tubes or a bellows or a focusing rail. When you get close, really close, you can NOT hand hold the camera. You can not just bounce about and shoot one type of picture, then simply snap a macro shot at better than 1:1. It will not work out because every tiny move by the camera will put your subject, or the small PART of the subject out of focus. You may not even KNOW you moved ! If you can not read a book or manual, then you're stuck. If you don't want to carry the gear to do it properly, it won't be possible to get good macro shots. </p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>John is blunt, but 100% correct. Even your raindrop shot, at low "web resolution", appears soft. Your claims of a "steady hand" are insufficient for the magnification you're already using, and will prove even less adequate if you try to increase the magnification.</p>

<p>If you don't believe me, borrow a 2x teleconverter (a device that goes between the lens and camera and doubles magnification) and try to get some sharp shots hand held. A good 2x TC (I don't know if the Canon 2x will work with the Canon 100mm macro, but the Kenko PRO-300 2X will definitely work,0) is a traditional and accepted way of increasing magnification. The Kenko is popular with macro shooters.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I didn't mean to be completely blunt, just a little blunt. :)</p>

<p>The reason is, I have tried to just walk around and get all sorts of cool close-up shots. Even with an extension tube and a lens , which did not even give me a 1:1 close-up ratio, I could not hold the camera steady enough. Breathing moved the lens too much. Trying to very, very slightly move the camera to change exactly what was in focus and what was not was most frustrating. To really get what I wanted, I needed a tripod AND I needed a remote trigger to the simple act of pressing the shutter button did not shake the camera too much. When you start getting really close, the camera acts more like a microscope and less like a camera. Hand held and shape shots just don't work out. <br>

There is NO magic lens and camera combination that will make this change. </p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, there are macro lenses and, then, there are macro lenses (said in my best haughty Barney Fife voice). The regular guys know all about 1:1 mainline production lenses but you have to talk to the horrible grizzled old ogres hiding in their dark little computer rooms if you want to know the real deal. And the way to go better than 1:1 is with a specialized lens built for industrial or government use. For example, my 4.4:1 macro (yes, 4.4x lifesize) lens. This specialized lens will not focus on infinity or distant objects. It was designed only for close ups. These type lenses show up on the auction site. The few people who are aware of their existance adapt them to their digitals like the micro 4/3, etc. And, yes, it is F1.0</p>

<p><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af291/razl/a.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="398" /><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af291/razl/b.jpg" alt="" /></p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Tom, a Cathode Ray Tube lens? Didn't even know they were corrected for such high reproduction ratio's, that is really cool.</p>

<p>Now, if you had a four-thirds camera you could adapt a Olympus OM mount Telescoping Auto Tube 65mm~116mm and get the trio of high mag macro lenses, the 80mm f4, 38mm f3.5 and 20mm f3.5 to go on the front. That will get you from 1:1 all the way to 8:1, at least it's not as bulky as a bellows.</p>

<p>That last bit about Oly macro was just a bit of silliness. Canon is fine, stick to what you got.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
<p>I use RAYNOX DCR-250 macro lens for Nikon. I bought it at eBay. I am very happy with it. It attaches to the front of my Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP macro lens. You have to order it for your specific camera. Most of the time the Tamron lens gives me enough magnification, though. If you try the Raynox, you will experience that it is even more difficult to get sharp images when using it. That is because you will have so little slack in dept of field on such close distances.<br /> <br /> If you handheld the camera when shooting macro, you will have to use high ISO values or speedlights.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

<p>The inverse squared law (or is it a rule or an administrative finding or...) applies behind the lens as well as in front of it. As you increase magnification the light that hits the film/sensor drops exponentially. In addition, depth of field becomes shallower, requiring smaller apertures unless you want a really shallow plane of focus and so the light reaching the film/sensor drops by at an additional exponential rate. Things get really dim back there. Hand held means that much brighter light (more and bigger flash) is required to prevent motion blurred images. At some point your flash will become powerful enough to cook living subjects. <br>

I think the smart thing is to buy extension tubes and see how you do with them. Remember that you can stack them for additional extension/magnification. They are inexpensive (compared to specialized macro lenses of any quality) and will always be useful because not every macro subject requires extreme magnification. If you still need more, can afford it, and think you can hold it still, go for the higher magnification solutions suggested previously. But I bet you are going to need a tripod. A flash would ruin that nice raindrop photo and so would motion blur.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...