Image quality of 70-200/2.8 and E.T. for macro work.

[marc_lorenzo]

I have an Elan IIe with a 20-35/3.5-4.5, 28-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 380EX

speedlite and a 3221 Bogen tripod with a 3055 Bogen ball head. I'm

most familiar with Sensia II 100, Velvia 50, Super G+ 400 and 800.

Most of my shooting have been landscape and candid travel photos. So

far I've been very happy with my gears and have gotten a few decent

8x10 photos to hang on my walls. This year, I want to try to shoot

some macro photography (wild flowers). Primarily, I'm thinking to use

my 70-200 with extension tubes rather than the cannon 100mm or 180mm

macro since this maybe a cheaper way to go to see if I would enjoy

this craft. Has anyone used this combination and how do you like the

image quality of the slides/prints? Thanks in advance!!!

[markci]

Don't use it with an extension tube -- it's an exercise in

frustration. Optically it's fine, but you won't be able to zoom it

without throwing things out of focus, and the minimum focus distance

will vary depending on focal length, so you may not be able to

refocus it at all. This is true in general for zooms with tubes.

 

<p>

 

Instead, get a Canon closeup diopter, if you can find one. Last I

checked B&H was out of stock, as was every local dealer I called, so

nowadays if I want to do near-macro work I usually wind up using my

300 f/4 IS lens with a tube and/or teleconverter.

[jason_elsworth1]

Don't quote me on this but I think you could use the Nikon diopters,

which are apparantly great.

[chuck_bettis]

The Nikon's are great, however, they don't make them in 72mm or 77mm

which is what you would need on your 70-200 2.8

[jason_elsworth1]

http://www.kirkphoto.com/polarizers.html

 

<p>

 

This should deal with the size problem I think. It is not something I

have tried myself.See filter rings at the bottom of the page.

[bobatkins]

I've used the Nikon diopters (62mm I think) on a Canon EF 80-200/2.8L

via a 62-72mm step down ring. You might expect to see some

vignetting, espacially at 200mm and especially working wide open, but

I don't recall seeing any (but then again I'm sure I never shot

wide open macros either!). You may need a small amount of EC though

as the body expects light based on an f2.8 aperture and at 200mm

a 62mm aperture can't be faster than f3.2 (you would need to add about

1/3 to 1/2 stop to compensate). I don't know what would

happen with the

77mm filter size on the 70-200/2.8L, but I'd worry a little about vignetting at 200mm.

It shouldn't be any worse than the 80-200/2.8, but it might

be.

[markci]

I've considered going to the stop-down-ring solution before, as I'd

certainly like to have a zoom macro option, but I've just been

holding out for the "really right stuff," (lowercase) as is my wont.

Actually, I haven't checked around for a while: for all I know B&H

has the 77mm Canons stacked to the rafters as we speak.

[bob_lester]

Vivitar makes (made?) a 100mm 3.5 macro lens that tested very good for about $150. I read the test in Natural Journal a few years ago. It was 1:2 and needed a front element to go 1:1. I think Popular Photography praised the sharpness of this lens also. I remember both reviews panned the AF and construction. Just a thought.

[william_castleman]

I have used my 70-200 2.8L with extension tubes and with the Canon

500D diopter (77mm). Both combinations with the 70-200 give excellent

images, although there is reported to be less image degradation with

the tubes than with the diopter. You would probably need to

photograph fine lines on flat fields to detect the diopter-associated

image degradation. There is light drop off with the tubes. As has

been pointed out, with the diopter you can use the zoom control as a

magnification control. A disadvantage of the 500D diopter for some

users is the relatively narrow focusing range. The 70-200/500D

combination set at 200mm for maximal magnification (1:2) allows you to

focus from 14 to 19 inches from your lens tip to the subject. In

contrast, if you use the 70-200 lens set at 200mm with 56mm of

extension (e.g., Kenko 20 and 36 mm tubes), working focus distance

varies between 18-29 inches from lens tip, and you still can achieve

approximately 1:2 magnification. I am using the 70-200/extension tube

combination because I like reasonable magnification at a longer

working distance for butterflies and other insects than I get with

either the 70-200/500D combination or with my 100mm f2.8 macro. I set

the 70-200 at 200mm and only turn the focus control. In effect, I

have a very heavy 200mm (prime) lens on extension tubes. Flexure has

not been a problem. From what you describe as your intended

photographic subject (wildflowers), the narrow focusing range with the

diopter shouldn't be a problem, and the ability to turn the zoom

control to vary magnification should be an asset.

[dick_ginkowski]

I will second William's observations. I use extension tubes (Kenko's

25mm and 12mm) on my 70-200 with very good results. I've also used

the 500D likewise and sometimes both. I've also used teleconverters

with an extension tube or 500D.

 

<p>

 

Yes, the extension tube can be a pain but I happen to like using a

zoom for macro work because it allows for creative composition once

you adjust to how to use it.

[bliorg]

Adorama's site lists the Canon 72mm 500D (2-element, minimum

focussing 19.7") at $115.00, and the 77mm 500D for $134.95. They

don't show the 250D (minimum focussing range: 9.9") in either size,

though both sizes are available in 52mm and 58mm (which is good, as

I've been considering the same options for my 75-300mm USM). They

also list Nikon close-up lenses: 62mm 6T ($39.95), and 52mm 0-4T (4T

for $32.95). I don't know what their current stock is; these items

ARE listed on their site, however, and I couldn't find anything

comprable on B&H or CameraWorld...

 

<p>

 

For what it's worth...

[matt_hagadorn]

If you get into macro, you'll probably end up with both tubes and a

close-up diopter. They both have their uses (and you might use tubes

in addition to a close-up diopter to get greater magnifications).

However, the close-up diopter would probably be the easiest to start

with. I would try out the Nikon 6T with a 77-62mm step-down ring and

run some tests stopped-down to see if it vignettes. If it does, send

it back (B&H will give you a 14-day return) and get the Canon 77mm

500D diopter.<p>

According to John Shaw's <em>Close-ups in Nature</em>, you'd need

100mm of extension to get to 1:2 on a 200mm lense. The diopter is

certainly the easier way to get there.

[keithneun]

Matt,

 

<p>

 

You certainly don't need 100mm of extension tubes to get the 70-200L

to 0.5x. A 25mm tube alone gets you 0.41x.

[lowe_h._wiggers__iii___]

Lots of good advice noted; let me suggest George Lepp's "Beyond the

Basics," published in 1993. One of the chapters, High Magnification

Field Techniques, addresses the techniques discussed here.