macro

[emanuele_nigrisoli]

Hi I was looking for some help about macro, please excuse me if it�s

FAQ.

I've 2 bodies Canon EOS 50;1000F;

4 Lenses 19-35mm f/3,5-4,5 Vivitar Serie 1, 35-135mm f/4,5-5,6 Canon

USM, 75-135mm f/4,5-5,6 Canon II and 50mm f/1,9 Canon.

I'm reading about macro and I'm so confused , I'd like to get photos

of insects, small reptiles, and flowers but I didn�t understand what

I really need for that.

Everybody tells me the Canon 100mm f/2,8 Macro is a good macro

lenses, I believe it but, do really I need it?, it�s too expensive

for my pockets !

What�s the minimum equipment that I need?

If I buy the Canon 50mm Macro, I�ll have 1:2 magnification , can this

lenses be powered by an extension tube in order to gain 1:1 or 2:1

or more?

 

 

 

 

Thanks, Emanuele

[paulo_bizarro1]

Hi,

For flowers your 50 mm lens and a 25 extension tube will be ok. You might try also one close-up lens with your zooms. For insects, you will need a greater working distance, which means a longer focal lenght macro. Just try the above combinations and save for the 100 mm Canon macro lens, you won't regret it.

Do not forget a good tripod that goes flat to the ground, and John Shaw's "Closeups in Nature". There is also a good "how to" book published by Canon: "Workshop on macro photography", you can order it from Eos Magazine (they have a web site). A reflector to position opposite your light source for fill in shadows is also quite useful.

Otherwise, just spend lots of film...

[jacques_desjardins]

Extension tubes on your 75-300 should give you satisfying results. A lady in the photo club I'm in won two club contest with that setup. She had bought the KENKO extension tube set on my recommendation and she's real happy now. I am too. Have fun and good luck.

[roberto_lins]

Hello Emanuele, I noticed you are in Italy and I wouldn't know how to

compare the prices. So, I'll try to discuss about some possibilities

based in the U$ currency. Although I'm not in position to say anything

about the Kenko extension tube for your Canon 75-300 seems a cheap and

reasonable option. Jacques, what about the magnification? Another

cheap option is the Vivitar 100mm f/3.5 Macro ($120). Its magnification is 1:2 and comes with life size attachment that allows you to go up to 1:1. The lens is not great, but I've heard lots of people who are happy with and even Popular Photography contest winners using this lens. The Sigma 105mm f/2.8 ($360) is naturally 1:1 and will give you a better results. Definitely the Canon lenses are the best choice in terms of image quality, (they are not USM), but based

on a limited budget I'd get the Sigma. It costs you just a bit more

($50) than the Canon 50mm f/2.5 which is only 1:2. Good luck with your

choice,

[de_isaacs]

Hey there -

I use Vivitar Extension tubes ($65US) and the Auto Bellows FD with a variety of lenses (maily 85 f1.8 / 135 f2.5 / and a 35-70 F4. I also use a Vivitar Series 1 90mm Macro (1:2 alone and 1:1with Lifesize Adapter (really an extension tube with a magnifying lens.

For flash I use a combination of off Camera flash (155a triggering a 199a via slave) or a Macrolite-1 (twin sidemount flashes attached to the end of the lens. I agree with Phil's and Bob's advice in general - shoot lots, and learn from what you shoot !

Good luck !

 

Derek Isaacs

[josh1]

Emanuele--I suggest that you seriously consider the canon 100/2.8 macro. I own this lens and it was worth every penny I paid for it. Both the optics and the build quality are superb. You can read a review of this lens on this webpage: http://www.photo.net/photo/canon/donb/100.html

As far as the canon 50/2.5 macro is concerned, I'm sure this is a fine lens, but this focal length is not quite as useful for macro photography. You won't be getting to many pictures of small reptiles with a 50mm lens. In fact, it is almost impossible with a 100mm lens unless you drug them or they are very cold. The 100 macro is also a fantastic lens for portraiture. Here in the U.S., the price for the 50 macro (U.S. warranty) and an extension tube or life size converter is almost as much as the 100 grey market price. Anyway, If you are going to do a lot of macro work, I think you should go for the 100. If its just occasional messing around with macro, then you might consider purchasing a an extension tube (25mm)and sticking it on your current 50mm lens. This should allow you to go to at least a 1:2 ratio (same as 50 macro) and the quality will still be very good.

[yoonki_kim]

I believe extention(or bellows) tube is better choice than Macro lens.

Its cheaper! And you can attach to any lens you have.

Of course you have to hauling heavy tripod around with you.

Yoonki

[bliorg]

Since no one's posted this yet, I'll through it in here: <a href="http://www.advanix.com/~photo/bobatkins/info/faq30/closeup2.htm">closeup options</a> for Canon users, from Bob Atkins' personal site.

<br><br>

I'll also add my experiences here. When I got started with macro, I opted for a Canon 500D two-element closeup lens (about $80US from B&H) for my 75-300. I didn't (at the time) have any primes short enough to warrant tubes, and as I wanted to go to 1:1, I'd need too much extension for the lenses I had. The closeup lens worked extremely well, and got me to about 0.85X. However, as you already have a precision, close-focusing lens (the 50/1.8), adding an equivalent amount of extension would probably be your best overall option. The advantage of the diopter over tubes, to me, is that light loss is negligible. As I don't generally use flash for macro, this counts to me.

<br><br>

Either way, you <b>don't</b> need to buy the 50 macro and extension, if you already have the 50/1.8. I've since upgraded to the Sigma 105 EX macro, have sold many photos taken with it, and use it as one of my main lenses. While the Canon's a great (exceptional) lens, I couldn't justify the extra cost at the time, and I recall reading somewhere that <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/macro.html">"it's difficult to buy a bad macro lens"</a>...

<br><br>

Good luck.

[leo s.]

Try reversing your existing lenses... A "reversing ring" will enable you to do this,and only costs $10-15 for the nikon ring,used from e-bay...i think cannon also makes one(and if they dont,someone probably makes them for the cannon mount).

Your 50/1.9 will give you around 1x(perfect for small flowers and medium sized insects like bees).I do about 80-90% of my macro using my nikon 28/2 and 50/1.8 reversed,and am very satisfied with the results!

See for yourself at my galery @

 

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=840536&a=7317430

[william_baguhn1]

That's a great solution, BUT EOS (and Maxxum) users beware: you lose control of your diaphragm (aperture) with a cheap reversing ring. No problem for Canon FD/FL, Nikon, Pentax, and Minolta MD/MC users, because these lenses all have aperture controls on them, rather than relying on electronics to control the stop-down.

 

Reversing rings still work in theory, but they're more expensive than $10-$15 that other reversing rings are, because to work properly, you need to run wires from the reversing ring to the "front" of the lens.

 

The other problem with reversing rings is that your filters don't protect the front surface of the glass anymore. Apparently, most people around here don't care, but it's something to be aware of.

 

Cheap reversing rings may be available for Maxxum and EOS mounts, and if they are, pick up a manual focus lens to go with them (as the manual lens will have an aperture ring).