500D vs macro lens vs ?

[thundery]

For about a month now I've been tossing around the thoughts of buying a Canon 100mm Macro. Macro photography would be pretty new to me except for shots I've taken with my Tamron. Thing is - I really like my setup now and everything fits into my camera bag just perfect - I've got 10mm->200mm covered and the bag is light enough that I don't mind traveling with it. An option to a new lens is the 77mm 500D filter for my 70-200 which I'm sure I could find room for in my bag vs having to change to a new bag and carry another lens.

I've search the forums for info on the 500D filter and have done some reading but still not sure if people really like it or not. An alternative is TC's and tubes which even confuses me more. Would any of you be able to help me clear my head on this? I'd really like to see some shots using the 500D filter if you have some.

Thanks in advance!

[René Damkot]

I'ld try a set of extention tubes. That way the Tamron and 70-200 will be usable at closer distance, and it will cost you next to nothing. I have a kenko 21mm or so, and use it with my 50, 100 and 80-200. Works okay (a real macro is better, but then again, I don't do macro that often).
The effect of an extention tube is dependant on focal length: a 21mm will give less effect on 200mm lens then on a 50mm. With the 50 you get a higher magnification, but a closer working distance.

[thundery]

Rene - you know: it proabably does make more sense to use something that doesn't limit me to just 1 lens - especially if I really don't know how much macro I'd really be doing. I'm really just looking to learn and play. Thanks!

[René Damkot]

I can also use my extention tube to fit the 10-22 EF-S to my 1D2.... The plane of focus @22mm is on the front element of the lens then however :p

[Mike K]

For about a month now I've been tossing around the thoughts of buying a Canon 100mm Macro. Macro photography would be pretty new to me except for shots I've taken with my Tamron.
An alternative is TC's and tubes which even confuses me more. Would any of you be able to help me clear my head on this? I'd really like to see some shots using the 500D filter if you have some!
The real issue is what you want to take a picture of and how big (close) do you want the subject to be. If you want 1-2" object to fill your frame then a 500D is not going to let you get close enough. If you go to the sticky thread at the top of the lens forum it talks about using a teleconverter with an extention tube, a combination that describes the lifesize converter. I have tried this too, but the image qulaity with a 100 macro are far better than an extention tube and 1.4X on a 24-70 at 70. If you don't need to get that close (say 4" across) then the 500D approach might work well for close focusing lense combinations. But for getting really close, these other combinations will not match a true macro lens.
Mike K

[J Rabin]

While certainly not as good as a macro lens, there are times and reasons to use an IS telezoom with a 500D. It's just costly. Like butterfly hunting or travel without a tripod.

I've used a 500D on the end of 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens. Mostly, I do this also using a Canon 1.4xTC, the 70-200 IS, then the 500D together. Together, the three offer somewhere about 0.7-0.8x reproduction, with hand held IS for field close-ups when traveling without a macro lens or tripod in the bag. The 1.4xTC alone gives you 280mm f/4 lens for travel. The longer the lens focal length, the greater the magnification gain from a diopter like the 500D.

However, that was then, when it was too hard to carry a 100mm 1:1 macro in a travel field kit that duplicated the 70-200mm focal length.
That was then. Now, on APS-C sensor camera, with the advent of the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro for $400 USD (the same cost as the 1.4xTC + 500D combined), it makes some sense to toss the EF-S 60mm in pocket. Sure this little lens lacks working distance, but what it lacks in working distance, it makes up in handholdability, and... it out-resolves my 180mm f/3.5L macro. Bold statement, I know.

Here's my notes:
http://postit.rutgers.edu/uploads/Macro%5FWork%5FDistance4.pdf


Someone above asked how big you want to reproduce.
This is 0.7x reproduction size. A true 1x or 1:1 macro would be even bigger:
http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~rabin/Insects/slides/Tomato_Hornworm_Parasite.htm

So, while I still use a macro lens for macro... when traveling, you can use like a 17-40mm, a EF-S 60 macro, and a telezoom. The EF-S60 is also the lower light lens in the travel kit. The Canon 20D focus screen was optimized for this lens.

Jack

[Gary W. Graley]

Well I had a 500D, planned on using it on my 200L, sold the L and bought the
Sigma 150mm F2.8 macro, so I sold the 500D recently, but, in defense of closeup
filters, I would recommend them, here is a shot taken with a Nikon 6t closeup
on a Canon 35-135, hand held shot;

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/GaryWGraley/EOS%2020D/coins2.jpg

The closeup lens can really help if you don't own a dedicated macro lens and what little
I did use the 500D, the images had very good contrast and sharpness about them, I'd
show you some... but my old computer died that had any images of that on there
the coin shot is from my photobucket page...

G2

[thundery]

Thank You for the photo and all the wonderful answers. Now all I have to do is figure out what I want to do. Just went up the hill to the casino so whatever it is - it's probably going to have to wait a couple of weeks :cry:

[Headcase650]

Adorama carries a set of Pro-optic extension tubes for $85, that much cheaper than the kenkos and from what I have read they are of good quality.