guidance on what lenses fit my camera, and if I should even buy one

[steviems]

I have been intrested in photography for a very short time. I have not taken

any classes, but I am quite intrested in very close shots..(macro?...very very

new,sorry). The trouble is that I am not sure which lenses fit the canon 30D,

and what would be considered a decent macro lens for a very moderate price (

near $250, hesitant to spend over $200 though...). I have read and re-read and

tried to figure out what the mm and f/ means, and why diffrent f/'s mean

pricer lenses. The only thing I am using so far to choose a lens are the

sample pictures on the canon consumer website. Im also quite confused about

how a 100mm could be a zoom, AND a macro. This I will have to figure out on my

own, but if anyone IS willing to help me, it would be very appreciated.

 

 

My main question though is what would be a good macro lens to buy at a decent

price, that works with my camera? I believe that all the canon EF lenses work

with my camera, but I need someone to confirm that.

The only lens i have is a 50mm 1:1.8, and Ive found that I cant do as much

with it as I would like to, which is very frustrating.

Is buying a macro lens a waste for someone who is just begining? Should I

suck it up and learn to work with what I have?

If someone could give me a bit of direction in this whole lens mess, I would

very much appreciate it, I feel quite lost and mainly, stupid.

Thank you very much, and if whoever is reading this is laughing at me, it's

ok, I probably would be too if it wasnt me.

[jcolwell]

You could start with a close up auxiliary lens which fits on your 50mm f/1.8; something like this <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=158&A=details&Q=&sku=87479&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation ">Canon 52mm 250D Close-up Lens</a>. While you're waiting for it to arrive, you could read: <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/digital/">photo.net articles</a> and

<a href="http://photonotes.org/articles/">PhotoNotes.org articles</a> to find out more about photography.

 

P.S. the 100mm macro is a telephoto and a macro, not a zoom.

[brainbubba_motornapkins]

You have several options for dipping your toe in macro without going the dedicated macro EF lens route: extension tubes, reverse lens mount adaptor (an EOS bayonet mount that screws into your lens front filter thread), and close-up lens sets. You could also consider buying an old screw mount macro lens, and an M42 adaptor. All have their drawbacks, but at least allow you to experience macro photography and decide if it's something that interests you, for a fairly low up front investment.

[leopoldstotch]

Any Ef or EF-S lens will work with your camera. Unless you use the MacGyver method to macro (which I use), $250 for macro is mostly a dream. The close up lens above just allows to to focus closer to the object, rather than enlarging the object, as a proper macro lens does. As for F-stops, the lower the number, the more light that gets let in, allowing for faster shutter speeds and a blurred background. There's a lot more for you to learn, so I suggest you get a good book (even photgraphy for dummies). Good luck.

[timcorridan]

agree w/ steve. use your 50mm, and read, study, get books, teach yourself the basics of photography. then you can make a purchase that fits what you want to capture. the 100mm 2.8 is a nice one, and can double for some landscape/ portrait. good glass cosrts more money. cheap glass, costs less. for the most part.

[mormegil]

I'm pretty happy with my set of Kenko Extension Tubes

 

They were under $200, and you can use them with different lenses (when you get more).

[jackson loi]

"Im also quite confused about how a 100mm could be a zoom, AND a macro."

</p>

 

This is just a label by the lens manufacturer indicating a close focusing ability of the zoom lens. A true macro lens should at least achieve 1:2 half of life-size or 1:1 life-size. To my best knowledge, no zoom lens can do that, and even if they can, image quality would be sub-optimal. If you haven't read Philip Greenspun's macro guide, it's a good reference for what gears to get.

</p>

http://www.photo.net/learn/macro/

</p>

 

A couple of good value macro lenses for Canon EOS are the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro and the Sigma 100m f/2.8 macro HSM.

 

</p>

"Is buying a macro lens a waste for someone who is just begining?" </p>

 

Absolutely not. If you Know that you need to take some pictures at a close range, which your 50/1.8 cannot do adequately, how can buying a macro lens be wasteful? The general rule is to find out what you want to do and determine your budget, and buy the appropriate equipment. Whether you are a beginner or not is irrelevant. BTW, you are asking a good, intelligent question.

[J.W. Wall]

To answer another part of your question, all Canon EF lenses fit the 30D camera, as well as EF-S lenses. In addition to the suggestions above, you will doubtless benefit from a good photo book, and one which I found very helpful as a beginner was London and Upton, "Photography." (Also recommended in the Learn section of photo.net.) For macro, you may like John Shaw's book, "Closeups in Nature." (It refers to older film equipment but the discussion and techniques are applicable today.) You may also consider a good photo class, such as your local community college may provide. Good luck!

[mark u]

There are some reasonable cost options for optically quite good macro lenses. One is the 100mm f/3.5 lens made by Cosina and sold under a number of different brand names, including Vivitar and Phoenix:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006Hlb&tag=

 

Be sure to get one in EF mount - KEH has one in excellent condition for just $133, Vivitar branded, currently.

[ericreagan]

Two things I think you should buy now:

<p>

1. The book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FUnderstanding-Exposure-Photographs-Digital-Updated%2Fdp%2F0817463003%2Fsr%3D8-1%2Fqid%3D1163555812%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks&tag=cyclingshots-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325">Understanding Exposure</a> by Bryan Peterson. The book is great for beginners and helps explain (and make simple) things like the "f/" and other fundamentals. Regardless of what kind of photography you are interested in, this book will offer significant guidance along the way. In my humble opinion, it's the best $15 you could possibly spend on this hobby.

<p>

2.A <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FKenko-Auto-Extension-Tube-Set%2Fdp%2FB000A1N8F8%2Fsr%3D8-1%2Fqid%3D1163555876%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Delectronics&tag=cyclingshots-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325">Kenko Extension Tube Set</a>. I recently purchased some extension tubes instead of a dedicated macro lens. I use them frequently on the 50mm f/1.8. They will help you obtain the macro image that you are seeking at a fraction of what a new lens costs.

<p>

These two items will put you well on your way in this great hobby. Once you gain more experience you'll know what kind of lenses that you should buy. It will all come with time and patience. Good luck.

<p>

Cheers!

[yakim_peled1]

Another vote for the Kenko extension tube set. IIRC it will give you more than 1:1 with your 50/1.8.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[athinkle]

You can get the Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro for 270 dollars.

[lester_wareham]

As has been said you could use your 50/1.8 with some tubes and get very respectable quality close-up shots right up to and sligtly over life size magnification.

 

The Kenko tubes have been mentioned, I can't recommend them myself as I found the came undone very easily and so switched to the Canon ones which although more expensive are much better made.

 

A macro lens is specially designed to have minimised aberations when used at close distances and will normally be superior to an ordinary lens with tubes. One of the main advantages of the macro lens is being able to focus from infinity to life size without external acessories. I suggest the Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM, its a very sharp macro lens focussing to life size but very good value for money. I have some research on macro equipment at the below link you may find of help. http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Macro_Equipment.htm

 

Your 30D will accept all EF mount lens including the EF-S mount lenses. The EF-S mount lenses can not be used on full frame cameras like the 5D and early APS-C camera like the 10D.

 

I don't know of any true macro zooms, often zoom lenses have a "macro" feature but this is really a marketing hype thing indicating some modest close focus capability of about 0.25X magnification, just about enough for a big flower. Many people think the close up magnification is something to do with zooming - it isn't. All Canon's macro lenses are prime fixed focus lenses.

 

Your 50/1.8 should be good for low light and portraite but will be limited for other things. You should have picked up the little kit lens with the body as this would cover most photographic neads although its not the best lens in the world and the build quality is horrid, the optical quality is not too bad - and it is cheap!.

 

I suggest you aim for a standard zoom, which for an APS camera will be in the 18-50mm range giving you reasonable wide angle to moderate telephoto.

 

Possibilities are:

EF 17-40/f4L : Very sharp and well respected lens, quite expensive, works on full frame

EF-S 18-55mm Kit Lens : Cheap but works, can't use on full frame

EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS : Relatively expensive but seems sharp, also has Image Stabalisation, can't use on full frame

 

Again I have some research on lenses at this link which might help you http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/lensselection.htm.

[m_barbu1]

The 100mm prime is a telephoto lens, but not a zoom.

[aleskoubik]

Stevie, I have 100mm f2.8 macro (on 5D) and it is a very sharp lens up to 1:1. One of the best non "L" (professional) lenses. Plus you can use this lens for your everyday use. It is a great portrait lens.

 

Good luck

A.

[yakim_peled1]

>> Plus you can use this lens for your everyday use. It is a great portrait lens.

 

Yes, unless AF slowness and not-so-shallow DoF do not bother you.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[aleskoubik]

"Yes, unless AF slowness and not-so-shallow DoF do not bother you"

 

I don't think f2.8 is too bad for portraits. Yes, the focus could be little faster but considering the cost vs. quality of this lens it not a bad lens.

[yakim_peled1]

Well, I had both and I think these are two different lenses for two different sectors in photography, although each can be used in the other with some success.

 

If you shoot a lot of macros and a bit of portraits than the 100/2.8 is the lens to get. However, if it's the other way around, the 85/1.8 is clearly superior, mainly due to its faster AF and shallower DoF.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[lester_wareham]

"Yes, unless AF slowness and not-so-shallow DoF do not bother you"

 

"If you shoot a lot of macros and a bit of portraits than the 100/2.8 is the lens to get. However, if it's the other way around, the 85/1.8 is clearly superior, mainly due to its faster AF and shallower DoF."

 

Hi Yakim

 

I think there is a misconception about AF speed on macro lenses, because the have a long focus arc it takes time to traverse from infinity to close focus, if you use the focus limiter and don?t allow the lens to hunt the 100/2.8 macro seems not significantly slower than any other USM lenses I have including the 200/2.8, 50/1.5 and 28/1.8.

 

I don?t have the 85/1.8 to compare it to but I would hope it?s faster but I doubt it is that obvious in most situations except low light perhaps.

 

As for the DOF issue, yes the 85/1.8 has slightly shallower DOF, but again its not a killer, for the 85 at a 2M distance and the 100 at 2.35M for the same magnification wide open the DOF is 34mm and 59mm respectively on APS-C.

 

Whilst the 85mm is the quintessential portrait lens on 35mm if your main functionality is macro one could argue the 85mm and the 100mm have a lot of function overlap. Anyway both the 85 and 100 are a little long on APS-C the 50/1.4 giving a good working distance although the control of DOF is not ideal IMHO.

[yakim_peled1]

>> if you use the focus limiter and don?t allow the lens to hunt the 100/2.8 macro seems not significantly slower than any other USM lenses I have including the 200/2.8, 50/1.5 and 28/1.8.

 

 

I had them all and I disagree.

 

 

>> As for the DOF issue, yes the 85/1.8 has slightly shallower DOF, but again its not a killer

 

 

1. I did say that each can be used in the other [sectors in photography] with some success.

 

 

2. It's not just that the DoF becomes more shallow. It's that the background blur becomes much blurrier. The combination of the two makes a big difference IMHO.

 

 

>> one could argue the 85mm and the 100mm have a lot of function overlap.

 

 

Some? I'd agree. A lot? Well, that's a matter of perspective.

 

 

>> Anyway both the 85 and 100 are a little long on APS-C the 50/1.4 giving a good working distance

 

 

For outdoor portraits I consider them perfect for APS-C. For indoor portraits I agree that 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 would be better.

 

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[steviems]

Thank you all for your advice, you have given me many, many things to think about. I have just bought <u>basic photography</u> by Michael Langford, and now things are starting to make sense.

My confusion with the macro/zoom lens was that I was stumped at how a zoom lens could be 100mm and a macro lens could also be 100mm, not one lens labeled as zoom and macro (i do think i saw one of those though).

I think what I'll do is buy the extensions for now, and see what could be done with that. I think I read here that they work with most lenses, so it would be a good thing to learn with.

Im going to be making a pinhole camera today ( Im feeling like im cheating with a digital, no element of suprise etc...)and hopefully that will give me some hands on experience with focal length and the amount of light with diffrent diameters.

Since it was suggested so many times, I do have my eyes on all the 100mm 2.8's on ebay. I would feel more comfortable if I bought one used from a dealer though.

Im suprised and pleased with the amount of responses, thank you all very much for taking your time to help me!

[steviems]

ive done it again! I ment macro/telphoto, not macro/zoom.