70-200 f/4L vs. 70-300 IS with a macro twist

[haltedsisyphus]

Long time reader, first time poster. XT owner for 6 months at 19000

shots (I�m new to photography and have embraced trial & error).

Current lenses: 18-55mm, 50mm 1.8/II, Peleng 8mm. Since purchasing

the XT, I have been planning to get the f/4L around this time. Like

many, I�m now torn between the L and the new IS.

 

The decision is difficult for me due to my inexperience. My lens

purchases don�t so much revolve around what I shoot; instead, my

shooting depends upon which lens I own. (e.g. I only started shooting

in low light after getting the 50mm, but I enjoy it). I lack any

defined objective and I�m still learning, but I know a good telephoto

zoom will round out my lens collection. I�m on a tight budget and

hope to have this purchase end my buying for quite a while.

 

So here�s the twist. I�ve come to enjoy macro shooting by holding a

reversed 18-55mm at 18mm to the camera body (usually stopped down to

f/8 or so using the DOF preview button). This has allowed for some

pretty good, though inconvenient and dust-speckled, shots at a

magnification somewhere around 3.66x. I am hoping to use my telephoto

zoom as a more convenient 1:1 macro lens with either the 6T (for the L

with a step-down ring) or the 500D (for the new IS).

 

And finally, my questions:

 

1) Given the popularity of the new IS, is the price likely to go below

its current $550 (after rebate) anytime soon? Since I�m new to the

game, I�m not familiar with Canon�s typical pricing schedules.

 

2) Will the pop-up flash do me any good in lighting my macro subjects

for both of these lens combinations?

 

3) Even if the 62mm 6T doesn�t vignette on the L with the 1.6 crop

sensor, is there curvature to the 62mm filter size 6T and the 67mm

filter size L that will make for a troubled optical marriage, perhaps

most noticeable at the borders?

 

4) B&H has shown a backorder for the 6T for a while. Will one be hard

to find?

 

5) Are there any reports on how the new IS performs with the 500D?

Any hunches?

 

6) Will the new IS + 500D combo be significantly better for handheld

macro work, due to the IS? Since the XT�s flash-sync is 1/200, will

there tend to be more 1:1 keepers at 300mm with IS than at 200mm without?

 

Important note: Although most of my questions relate to macro uses, it

is only a side consideration for my lens purchase. The 100 macro has

been tempting, but as of now I think one of the zooms will round off

my beginner�s lens collection better. I have weighed the other

factors of the L and the new IS, so no need to rehash those on this

thread, but these six questions remain for my decision.

 

Thanks so much to those willing to help with any of the questions on

this marathon of a post.

[PatrickMP]

<p style="border-style: groove">1) Given the popularity of the new IS, is the price likely to

go below its current $550 (after rebate) anytime soon? Since Iým new to the game, Iým not

familiar with Canonýs typical pricing schedules.

<p>I'll hazard a guess and say No. The 70-200/4L is an <EM>L</EM> lens, which in its

own right usually demands a higher price tag.

<p style="border-style: groove">2) Will the pop-up flash do me any good in lighting my

macro subjects for both of these lens combinations?

<P>I haven't done any macro shooting with Canon, but from previous experience (Using

macro lenses and bellows on Pentax 35mm) on-camera flash isn't as useful. You are

getting pretty close to the subject, so the lens itself interferes with the flash. You can get

a ring style flash system which is then technically "on camera", but it isn't the same as your

pop-up.

<P>AFAIK there is no bellows for the Canon EOS system which is a serious shortfall, and

one reason I kept all of my Pentax gear. I'm aware there are macro lenses, but a bellows

gives you some might fine control in severe macro work.

[steve santikarn]

for the telephoto zoom, wait a bit and get the new 70-300 IS when the price is below 500 USD.

For macro, save up and get a proper macro lens (Tamron if you can't afford a Canon one).

On camera flash is not much good for real close-up, but o.k. for medium distance (like a flower shot).

[bsd230]

If you want a great zoom, get the 70-200 4L. As far as using the popup flash, it won't work all that great for Macro. Especially if you are using a large lens, you more than likely get a big dark ring at the bottom of your photo depending on how close you get. Ideally for great macro photos get the 100mm Macro with a ring light. And you will need tons of light to get good hand held macro photos with any lens IS or no IS. You are better off to use a tripod.

[awindsor]

The on camera flash is not very useful for macro work. I use a regular flash on the end of a cord. A tripod with a macro rail is definitely the weapon of choice for plant macros. I do almost all my macro work handheld with a flash. You can easily hold the camera for the duration of the flash and at f22, ISO100 and 1/250s you can forget about ambient pollution. Handholding at high magnification using ambient light is nearly impossible. I have shot handheld macro using ambient light but you need direct blazing noon day sun.

 

I know that you said that macro is secondary for the lens purchase but have you considered the Vivitar 100mm. You can find them for a little over $100. It is a plastic piece of garbage (though it has a metal mount) but since you have the 50/1.8 you already know that some plastic pieces of garbage take bloody good photos. By all accounts the Vivitar (Pheonix or Cosina - this lens gets is shipped under a bunch

of different brands from Cosina) is one of these.

 

I don't have the 6T but have heard that it does not vignette. Not only do you have the crop factor but you will be stopped down to f16 or f22.

 

I have the 70-200/4 and would probably go that way again for the ergonomics and AF performance. Having said that the 70-300 is incredibly attractive and much nicer walk around lens.

[mike_broderick]

The 70-200/4 probably won't drop in price appreciably. As long as you are up around 200mm, it works great with the Nikon 6T and an adapter.

 

I'd expect that the IS on the new 70-300 would be helpful for closeup work, but have no direct experience (I know for sure that IS is helpful on the 300/4 IS, though). I haven't compared the 70-300's minimum focusing distance to the 70-200/4 though. If the new lens has a much larger minimum focusing distance than the shorter L, that would be a strike against it.

 

The rule of thumb that steady handholding is possible at shutter speeds of 1/focal length doesn't really apply so well at higher magnifications.

 

I second Alistair's comment that the Vivitar 100mm macro is an excellent and affordable way to dip your toe into macro work. I'd expect it to be much more satisfactory for macro than a zoom lens with a diopter. I confess to being sentimental about the Vivitar 100macro, as one of these was my first "real" macro lens.

[yakim_peled1]

Get none: If you're so interested in macro, get a macro lens. My recommendations are either Canon 100/2.8 USM or Tamron 180/3.5.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[mark u]

"...a magnification of 3.66x" is the territory of the MP-E 65.

[awindsor]

True, but he is looking for a medium budget solution that gives a flexible telephoto zoom. I only mentioned the Vivitar since it is not much more than a decent two element close-up lens. The MP-E 65mm may be many things but a flexible telephoto zoom it is not (failing, in my opinion, on all three counts!)

 

The 70-300 IS is definitely the most flexible of the 2 options. It does not seem to AF as fast as the 70-200/4 (which has a true ring USM rather than a micromotor USM) and has a rotating front element but on an XT the 70-300 IS tested as optically superior to the 70-200/4 at photozone.de.

 

The 70-300 close focuses at 1.5m while the 70-200 close focuses at 1.2m.

[jackson_l]

Well, if cost is a big factor and you're primarily interested in macro work, you turn your 50mm and a Pringles can into an extension tube. Some cutting, some glue, and voila! You have hella cheap macro plus starchy snacks. Doing so requires a bit of adventurousness, but since you' re shooting macro by reversing your 18-55, this might be right up your alley. Instructions available here:

 

http://www.photocritic.org/2005/macro-photography-on-a-budget/

 

You can also Google "pringles extension tube" for more.