-=TOP TEN=- Which macro lens do you use?

[Lester Wareham]

those of you that shoot the Canon 100mm, do you use a tripod ring on the lens or the camera to mount on tripod?

$143 for the ring mount seems extreme.

just wondered if it was necessary on a lens that only 1.6lbs.

thanks

No I mostly shoot handheld, sometimes with a monopod.

If I do use a tripod or monopod a lot I might use the ring, but an L-plate on the camera is fine, the ring is just a convenience.

The ring is the TMA-B, this comes with a number of lenses, I have two, a white one with the 300/4 IS and a black one with the MP-E 65mm (I normally use that one). To use one of these rings however you need a little plastic adaptor, this is very cheap as a spare part.

This link gives you the details of getting this part and using it http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/macroMTF/tma%20for%20100mm.htm

Performance wise, the action and locking is not as smooth as it is with a lens designed to operate with a TMA-B directly, but it works fine.

I wouldn't recommend paying for the whole ring, but if you get one of the lenses that comes with the ring it is worth the small price of the adaptor to be able to use it.

[AccidentalArt]

Thanks LW. The only ring i currently have is on the 100-400, so im betting its a bit larger.

thanks again for the comments and link provided.

RW

[Lester Wareham]

Thanks LW. The only ring i currently have is on the 100-400, so im betting its a bit larger.

thanks again for the comments and link provided.

RW

According to this it is in fact the right ring http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/EOS/CanonTripodCollars

So all you need is the little plastic widget.

[AkPhotos]

I have used many, first the 100mm 2.8 macro. then the Tamron 180mm macro ( Great Lens, esp for the $$!!). Now I shoot the Canon 180mm 3.5 L. WOW talk about tack sharp! Once you use it you wont use any other lens!

Kevin in Alaska.

This was taken with the Canon 180 Macro
http://akphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p563278192-2.jpg

Tamron 180 Macro
http://akphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v3/p262420759-2.jpg

If you want a great lens. Either of these are it. I feel these are the top 2 macro lenses. esp with the twin tube macro light added, but neither of these had a flash used.

Kevin in Alaska

[DarrinMB]

I originally purchased the Canon EF 100 macro lens but after a couple close calls while shooting a wasp building her nest and a California Diamonback rattlesnake I decided to trade up for the Canon 180L and havent looked back. I LOVE this lens.

[ShutterMomma]

Ok. Can someone recommend the best Macro setup(lens & accessories) for the Canon XTi.

[regs777]

im using Canon 100mm f2.8 USM 1:1
..its a great macro lens.

reggie santos
http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/free/gallery.asp?memberID=120486

[Lester Wareham]

Ok. Can someone recommend the best Macro setup(lens & accessories) for the Canon XTi.

If you search around you will find lots of discussions on this for APS-C cameras.

A good suggestion is the EF 100mm macro USM for general macro photography.

[HiImSean]

i just got my 100mm macro in the mail today. i haven't used it too much but i love it so far :D

[Vue2aStill]

I have the 60mm, two Canon tubes and the 500D. I want to buy another macro lens, but just can't decide which one to go for.

I want to buy a macro lens.
1. But I want to know if I can buy a 500D and attach it to the 24-105 F4 IS I have?
2. If this works, what are the limitations of this set up compared to, say, a 100mm Macro lens?

Thank you for your help.
-Vue

[Lester Wareham]

I want to buy a macro lens.
1. But I want to know if I can buy a 500D and attach it to the 24-105 F4 IS I have?
2. If this works, what are the limitations of this set up compared to, say, a 100mm Macro lens?

Thank you for your help.
-Vue

If you look at your lens manual you will see that for a 500D at 24mm you get magnifications of 0.05-0.11x and at 105mm you get 0.02X-0.34X.

A macro lens like the 100mm macro gives you infinity focus down to 1x and will provide better image quality. 0.34x is probably OK for fairly big flowers and perhaps dragonflies.

[xanathar]

I use Canon 60 f2.8 and Canon 100 f2.8

[AccidentalArt]

I just bought the tamron 180mm. Can't wait to play with it. How have reviews been on here by users?

[Elphaba]

I checked the MPE65 because that is the macro lens in my gear closet that gets the most workout, now... but I did start with a Canon 100 2.8f macro, and still have it because it is a versatile lens.

[AccidentalArt]

nevermind if you read the previous question, found that a TC will work if you use an Ext Tube
RW

[R-C-G]

Canon 20mm macrophoto lens + auto bellows, but it isn't on the list.

[Vue2aStill]

If you look at your lens manual you will see that for a 500D at 24mm you get magnifications of 0.05-0.11x and at 105mm you get 0.02X-0.34X.

A macro lens like the 100mm macro gives you infinity focus down to 1x and will provide better image quality. 0.34x is probably OK for fairly big flowers and perhaps dragonflies.

Thank you very much for your advice. My budget right now will not permit me to go for a dedicated Macro lens. I guess I will settle for a 500D for now. Do you foresee any other specific issues with the 500D on the 24-105, other than what you mentioned about inifinity focus?
THanks in advance.
-Vue

[Lester Wareham]

Thank you very much for your advice. My budget right now will not permit me to go for a dedicated Macro lens. I guess I will settle for a 500D for now. Do you foresee any other specific issues with the 500D on the 24-105, other than what you mentioned about inifinity focus?
THanks in advance.
-Vue

Other than not having tried it no, best to stop down well which you will probably want to anyway f8 to f11. I use to use closeup filters many years ago sometimes, they were not bad as long as well stopped down, the 500D should be better quality than these. I am not sure if the 500D is multicoated so you might be careful about back-lighting causing flare.

I am sure some instructions come with the 500D but you could test to see how well in performs. I suggest you setup on a tripod at home first (if you can't afford one try resting the camera on a flat surface) and use a target ideally flat with high contrast detail (a bank note) rig the target still and square on and take shots at a range of apertures. Then have a look at the results on the computer and see what aperture range the sharpness is best over. You might want to publish your findings here for others to benefit from.

Good luck.

[Sasquatch41]

I use the Canon 70-200 f2.8 with a set of Kenko extension tubes with very good results.

[sai-gon-xua]

thanks :p

[Torcidas]

I use canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens and I'm waiting for extension tubes to come to me then will decide will I go and buy MP-E 65+ flash ring or only flash.. I see that beautiful bug colection of photos with MP-E 65 and I fell in love with that lens:) http://www.beautifulbugs.com :)

[Lester Wareham]

I use canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens and I'm waiting for extension tubes to come to me then will decide will I go and buy MP-E 65+ flash ring or only flash.. I see that beautiful bug colection of photos with MP-E 65 and I fell in love with that lens:) http://www.beautifulbugs.com :)

Definatly the MP-E but consider the twin flash over the ring flash, lots of operational advantages. Search on this or read http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Macro_Equipment.htm#MF%20Introduction with the MP-E the ability to operate the focus assist lights from the shutter button is a big factor.

[Mathiau]

now i am looking between the MP and the 60... i really want 1-5 but for an extra $600 vs 1:2

[Lester Wareham]

now i am looking between the MP and the 60... i really want 1-5 but for an extra $600 vs 1:2

Hmm, if you mean the EF-S 60 then that is only 1:1 on its own. 100mm + 68mm stack of tubes gives about 2:1, the EF-S will give a bit more but with less working distance.

So at 1:1 working distances are:
EF-S 60 : 86mm
EF 100 : 143mm
MP-E 65: 101mm

The 100mm and the MP-E are the classic choice for bug photography IMHO, specially on APS-C cameras.

[mypoppy31]

I dont use a lens, I use the Kenko extension tubes. I really like the results using the tubes. I had intended to buy the Canon 100 2.8 Macro lens, but decided on the Kenko instead. Much less expensive than the Canon Macro lens to be sure. The only problem I'm having using the Kenko tubes is focusing which is due to my inexperience with the tubes. Can only hope that I improve on the focusing problem.

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=SalPedi

[racketman]

I use canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens and I'm waiting for extension tubes to come to me then will decide will I go and buy MP-E 65+ flash ring or only flash.. I see that beautiful bug colection of photos with MP-E 65 and I fell in love with that lens:) http://www.beautifulbugs.com :)

had a look at his 'best' gallery and have to say his lighting is too uneven or harsh in most cases - makes me wonder if he has diffused his twin lights.

[gerrym7]

had a look at his 'best' gallery and have to say his lighting is too uneven or harsh in most cases - makes me wonder if he has diffused his twin lights.

I read his "how to" section because I'm a complete newbie at all this. I bought my first D-SLR (Canon 40D) about 2 months ago, and the Sigma 150mm Macro 2 weeks ago, and joined this forum yesterday. Needless to say, I'm still a little confused - especially about using a teleconverter to increase focal length and effective magnification.

Am I correct to say that a 2X teleconverter does not change or increase the minimum focusing distance, and that's why magnification would be increased to 2:1? But it would allow 1:1 with twice the old distance because of the increased focal length?

He also states that using a 2X teleconverter will result in 2 stops of light reduction, but that it doesn't matter since you stop down anyway for increased DOF. This means that although the 2X will decrease the light - you get 2 stops worth of increased DOF as a bonus? For some reason I figured that a teleconverter would just reduce the light, but you'ld still be stuck with the f/2.8 equivelant depth of field. I hope I'm reading this right...

[Madweasel]

I read his "how to" section because I'm a complete newbie at all this. I bought my first D-SLR (Canon 40D) about 2 months ago, and the Sigma 150mm Macro 2 weeks ago, and joined this forum yesterday. Needless to say, I'm still a little confused - especially about using a teleconverter to increase focal length and effective magnification.

Am I correct to say that a 2X teleconverter does not change or increase the minimum focusing distance, and that's why magnification would be increased to 2:1? But it would allow 1:1 with twice the old distance because of the increased focal length?

He also states that using a 2X teleconverter will result in 2 stops of light reduction, but that it doesn't matter since you stop down anyway for increased DOF. This means that although the 2X will decrease the light - you get 2 stops worth of increased DOF as a bonus? For some reason I figured that a teleconverter would just reduce the light, but you'ld still be stuck with the f/2.8 equivelant depth of field. I hope I'm reading this right...
The depth of field thing cancels out, because you're effectively at a smaller aperture, but you're also at a longer focal length. At macro distances, DOF is related to magnification alone. Being closer with a shorter lens is just the same as being further away with a longer lens. If the subject is at 1:2 or 1:1 or whatever, the DOF will be the same at the same aperture on either lens combination.

[Lester Wareham]

I read his "how to" section because I'm a complete newbie at all this. I bought my first D-SLR (Canon 40D) about 2 months ago, and the Sigma 150mm Macro 2 weeks ago, and joined this forum yesterday. Needless to say, I'm still a little confused - especially about using a teleconverter to increase focal length and effective magnification.

Am I correct to say that a 2X teleconverter does not change or increase the minimum focusing distance, and that's why magnification would be increased to 2:1? But it would allow 1:1 with twice the old distance because of the increased focal length?

He also states that using a 2X teleconverter will result in 2 stops of light reduction, but that it doesn't matter since you stop down anyway for increased DOF. This means that although the 2X will decrease the light - you get 2 stops worth of increased DOF as a bonus? For some reason I figured that a teleconverter would just reduce the light, but you'ld still be stuck with the f/2.8 equivelant depth of field. I hope I'm reading this right...

The thing you do need to watch with teleconverters is if they are not reporting ones, or don't report with the lens (ie when you fit the teleconverter the lens max apature is the same as without it).

If this is the case you need to remember the f-stop you set is actual 2 stops smaller. It is important to to set the f-stop too small to avoid diffraction softening.

Also for high magnification (> 1X) you should use wider f-stops for the same reason.

DOF can be caculated, it does not depend on focal length but on magnification and a property of the lens called pupilary magnification. In SLR lenses pupilary magnification is associated with ocal length.

More in these topics on one of my rambling pages
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/dof/dof.htm#DoF_with_Macro_Photography
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/dof/dof.htm#Diffraction

[DigitalSpecialist]

I use the MPE65, and a 50-1.2 with extension rings.

[dfrois]

Hi all,

I`m new here, but I am wondering why is it that the Canon 50 mm f/2.5 EF Macro Lens is not on the list? I use it a bit, and with good results, but most of my pics are made with old, manual M42 lenses on a bellows. Sometimes I cheat and use Nikon-mount lenses on the Canon bodies, via adapter. BTW, I do not have any of the lenses mentioned on the poll...

DF

[Madweasel]

Hi all,

I`m new here, but I am wondering why is it that the Canon 50 mm f/2.5 EF Macro Lens is not on the list? I use it a bit, and with good results, but most of my pics are made with old, manual M42 lenses on a bellows. Sometimes I cheat and use Nikon-mount lenses on the Canon bodies, via adapter. BTW, I do not have any of the lenses mentioned on the poll...

DF
It is, it's the last one on the list, but erroneously labelled f/2.8. There has never been a Canon EF 50mm f/2.8 macro, so I'm sure it should be the f/2.5.

[dfrois]

Thanks for enlightening me. I thought it might be the case, as I have never heard of a 50mm 2.8 Macro EF lens, but I don`t pretend to know all the Ef lenses. I casted my vote accordingly.

DF

[AlexuRO]

I use with successfully a Sigma EX 105 2.8 DG Macro . Is an affordable lens with good construction and also a sharpen lens . I think is a veritable rival for Canon 100 f2.8 Macro in my opinion !

[Mathiau]

Hmm, if you mean the EF-S 60 then that is only 1:1 on its own. 100mm + 68mm stack of tubes gives about 2:1, the EF-S will give a bit more but with less working distance.

So at 1:1 working distances are:EF-S 60 : 86mm
EF 100 : 143mm
MP-E 65: 101mmThe 100mm and the MP-E are the classic choice for bug photography IMHO, specially on APS-C cameras.


mp-e 65, always get it confused..LOL

i had to settle for now with the 00mm canon macro, 100mm were out of stock, really have to get used to the working distance... i guess good proatice for when i get the mp-e 65

[pratman64]

How about including Tokina AT-X 35M f/2.8 to this list? It's a newcomer.

[MClassImages]

I have the Canon 60mm f/2.8

[thk sno]

Just bought the Canon 60mm 2.8 Macro. Now I have to sit and wait for it to arrive...

[k.sendide]

I have the Canon 100mm Macro and waith for MPE-65 to get back to B&H or Adorama (gray market version, which allos me to get the soft case too with the same price of the USA one), been waiting for more than a week now :cry:

[planters]

Why no sigma 70 f2.8 macro? I use it and love it!!!

[macro junkie]

mpe-65 rules :D

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1182/1198470338_a7cf8aa099_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3166/2310638737_fdf691c6b2_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2410/2349318393_641d9eb193_o.jpg

[b.d.bop]

mpe-65 rules :D

I'm with ya, dude. Nuttin' like it.

Scott - I removed my MP-E's lens collar - this lens is light enough and I'm using it handheld 99% of the time anyway. I see you've left yours on. Any reason?

[Lester Wareham]

I removed my MP-E's lens collar - this lens is light enough and I'm using it handheld 99% of the time anyway. I see you've left yours on. Any reason?

In my case: I sometimes do remove the collar, but I often use the collar with a monopod to steady the rig for 5:1 or just take the weight of camera, lens and flash.

[b.d.bop]

In my case: I sometimes do remove the collar, but I often use the collar with a monopod to steady the rig for 5:1 or just take the weight of camera, lens and flash.
Right. Its foot is already just so close to the camera's center of gravity that I find it almost awkward with it on, and it definitely gets in my way for handhelds.
But everything's in flux. Perhaps I'll change my mind with more MP-E experience. :cool:

[Lester Wareham]

Right. Its foot is already just so close to the camera's center of gravity that I find it almost awkward with it on, and it definitely gets in my way for handhelds.
But everything's in flux. Perhaps I'll change my mind with more MP-E experience. :cool:

Interestingly this is the opposite of the 300/4 IS, where I leave the TMA in place handheld as I use it:

i) as a grip which OK even if manual focusing, no good on the MP-E because it gets too long

ii) to clip the lens/camera on my belt when carrying, I have a neck strap on for safety but use the foot as a hook to take the weight off my neck. No good with the MP-E as I normally have the twin flash mounted which would be a bit awkward like that, plus the MP-E is not so heavy anyway.

;)

[b.d.bop]

Interestingly this is the opposite of the 300/4 IS, where I leave the TMA in place handheld as I use it:

i) as a grip which OK even if manual focusing, no good on the MP-E because it gets too long


ii) to clip the lens/camera on my belt when carrying, I have a neck strap on for safety but use the foot as a hook to take the weight off my neck. No good with the MP-E as I normally have the twin flash mounted which would be a bit awkward like that, plus the MP-E is not so heavy anyway.
;)

#2's a clever idea, Lester! I like that. Thanks for the pearl! :D

[macro junkie]

i had to settle for now with the 00mm canon macro,
wow.i bet the focal distance on that is tight :lol::p

[macro junkie]

I'm with ya, dude. Nuttin' like it.

Scott - I removed my MP-E's lens collar - this lens is light enough and I'm using it handheld 99% of the time anyway. I see you've left yours on. Any reason?
thats an old pic..soon as i realised it could come off i pulled it off:)

[macro junkie]

mpe-65 is one lens that needs tons of practice

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1434/952712731_666579a28b_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2269/2185764136_a0e1942a0d_b.jpg

[LiquidSword]

First post, I think.

I use the 60mm 2.8 on my XTi. I love it for its quality/sharpness, and its FOV that lets me use it as a Portrait lens.

[daugirdas]

I use 100mm macro USM for obviously macros, but also portraits and a fair bit of landscapes. No other lens that I've tried comes even close to the IQ. I would only swap it for the imaginary 100mm f/2.8 USM IS version.

[andrikos]

This poll pushed me over to the ef 100mm side.
Not that I needed much convincing mind you.
Still, the everest of macro is the MP-E which I will buy when I'm good enough to use it.
Maybe in a couple of years...

[Glenn NK]

Wow, second place isn't even close.

Guess I have the right lens.:cool:

[Tendy]

Well my weapon of choice isn't on the list. Its a Cosina/Vivitar 100 f3.5 that I got from a fellow snapper for free! It uses a supplementary lens to get to 1:1 but is a good optic!

[leoni]

Hello All!

which lens do you think i better: tamron 90 or tokina 100mm

thanks

[Mazu]

Haven't used the Tamron 90 mm but can recommend the Tokina. How big is the price difference? I don't think you can really go wrong with either one but Tokina was the cheaper one where I live.

[rgeerts]

The 100mm is great, I have been using it for years and I am still amazed by the level of detail it can produce. Another feature I like is that this lens is light enough to work without a tripod (a key requirement for my type of field work).

http://odonata.eu/libellula-depressa/libellula-depressa-male-d.jpg

[LWK]

I love my Sigma 105mm, f/2.8 - sharp as a tack!!

[airdima]

gotta love my canon 100mm :)

[cameronlane]

I used the Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro because it seems like a good entry-level macro lens to learn on. I plan to eventually move up to the MPE-65, since that seems to be the ultimate Canon macro. :)

[Macro Madness]

Santa brought me a Canon 100 for Christmas. Can't wait to start using it!:)

[nwa2]

Useful poll. With the popularity of the 100mm f2.8, I am surprised there are not more on the second hand market.

[jitu757]

Any of these happen to be "L" lens?

Canon 60 f2.8
Canon 100 f2.8
Canon 180 f3.5

[Madweasel]

Any of these happen to be "L" lens?

Canon 60 f2.8
Canon 100 f2.8
Canon 180 f3.5
Only the 180mm, but they are all superb, so don't let that sway you.

[CanonGlass3]

I dont have a DSLR xD

[AccordGuy]

Just voted for my Canon 180.

I bought it as I liked the idea of taking pictures of stuff in the wild without having to get too close to it and also because it lets me take shots indoors with a very minimal studio. The very small angle of view that 180mm gives you means a sheet of A4 and some CD cases or old bits of card can fill a background easily on my desk. The less background you have in a macro shot the less you have to worry about getting rid of any annoying things in that background.

As mentioned by others, it also doubles as a very good telephoto lens for regular size quarry at range (deer, birds, cats, etc.). I like to keep the tripod mount on it even when hand holding as it's a pretty convenient grip for the long heavy lens.

Someone mentioned putting the 1.4 extender on this lens. I've got one of those that I use all the time with a 70-200 f/4L IS and it's never occurred to me to put it on the macro... How weird is that? :?

[Lester Wareham]

Just voted for my Canon 180.

I bought it as I liked the idea of taking pictures of stuff in the wild without having to get too close to it and also because it lets me take shots indoors with a very minimal studio. The very small angle of view that 180mm gives you means a sheet of A4 and some CD cases or old bits of card can fill a background easily on my desk. The less background you have in a macro shot the less you have to worry about getting rid of any annoying things in that background.

As mentioned by others, it also doubles as a very good telephoto lens for regular size quarry at range (deer, birds, cats, etc.). I like to keep the tripod mount on it even when hand holding as it's a pretty convenient grip for the long heavy lens.

Someone mentioned putting the 1.4 extender on this lens. I've got one of those that I use all the time with a 70-200 f/4L IS and it's never occurred to me to put it on the macro... How weird is that? :?

You must let us know of what it is like with the 1.4X on in the macro range. I am sure many are interested.

[AccordGuy]

You must let us know of what it is like with the 1.4X on in the macro range. I am sure many are interested.

Sounded like an instruction to play with my camera all Saturday morning :D

I set up two comparison photo scenes. One with a bunch of shells I had on my desk ("always keep some shells handy", is what I say). This gives you something 3D to look at. The second is a nearly perpendicular close-up of a 1000 Yen bank note - even more handy to have now that the Pound has collapsed to an all-time low against the Yen :rolleyes:

The shots were all taken with the 5D with a Canon 180mm f/3.5L for the 1:1 shots and with the Canon 1.4x Mk2 extender for the 1.4:1 shots. A tripod, cable release and mirror lock-up were used. Manual focus, manual exposure, manual WB to keep everything the same. Light was constant.

The extender has lens data pass-through and the body and latest version of DPP knows this combination too. So when you look at the info for the RAW files in DPP it tells you that the shot was taken with / without the extender. You lose 1 stop of light with the extender but if you are shooting stopped down you don't even notice the extender being added as the body remembers that you had requested f/16 and adjusts automatically so that the shot with the extender is taken with the same effective exposure as without.

The only post processing was in DPP to tweak the RAW brightness (by the same amount for each type of shot). Then I converted to 16 bit TIF and compressed to a 70-80% quality JPEG at full resolution. The bank note files are 2Mb and the shells are 1Mb.

The bank note wasn't a new one so wasn't perfectly flat so the focus is a little bit soft in the left of the frame.

ISO was 200, f/16 for all shots with exposure times of around 1.6s.

Changing to use the 1.4 extender had no effect on the positioning or focus of the camera. I could just put it on the back of the 180 lens and leave everything as it was before. The fact that the 180 has such a long working distance from the macro subject meant that I could change the lens without disturbing the scene being shot.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2mcdgew.jpg Note 1.4:1
http://i43.tinypic.com/ngeyyb.jpg Note 1:1

http://i40.tinypic.com/2znsjyv.jpg Shells 1.4:1
http://i41.tinypic.com/ojgm1h.jpg Shells 1:1

Dunno about other browsers but if you're using Firefox 3 then clicking on each link opens it in a new tab so you can flick between them to compare.

IQ seems not to be adversely affected by the extender (similar experience to use with the 70-200 telephoto) so I'll have to play with this combo some more in future.

[edit] Seems that the image hosting site doesn't allow the full resolution image as they have scaled to 55% of the original. Still gives you a good representation of what the originals looked like though.

[vision35]

The 100mm macro is beautiful prime lens. Its also weighs a bit. Time to lift weights lol. Yet I don't regret buying it. It was finally time to accept the digital phase/ transition.
The modern digital the lens & body weigh more than the old canon FD combined with AE-1 program with a 100mm lens.

[Lester Wareham]

Sounded like an instruction to play with my camera all Saturday morning :D

I set up two comparison photo scenes. One with a bunch of shells I had on my desk ("always keep some shells handy", is what I say). This gives you something 3D to look at. The second is a nearly perpendicular close-up of a 1000 Yen bank note - even more handy to have now that the Pound has collapsed to an all-time low against the Yen :rolleyes:

The shots were all taken with the 5D with a Canon 180mm f/3.5L for the 1:1 shots and with the Canon 1.4x Mk2 extender for the 1.4:1 shots. A tripod, cable release and mirror lock-up were used. Manual focus, manual exposure, manual WB to keep everything the same. Light was constant.

The extender has lens data pass-through and the body and latest version of DPP knows this combination too. So when you look at the info for the RAW files in DPP it tells you that the shot was taken with / without the extender. You lose 1 stop of light with the extender but if you are shooting stopped down you don't even notice the extender being added as the body remembers that you had requested f/16 and adjusts automatically so that the shot with the extender is taken with the same effective exposure as without.

The only post processing was in DPP to tweak the RAW brightness (by the same amount for each type of shot). Then I converted to 16 bit TIF and compressed to a 70-80% quality JPEG at full resolution. The bank note files are 2Mb and the shells are 1Mb.

The bank note wasn't a new one so wasn't perfectly flat so the focus is a little bit soft in the left of the frame.

ISO was 200, f/16 for all shots with exposure times of around 1.6s.

Changing to use the 1.4 extender had no effect on the positioning or focus of the camera. I could just put it on the back of the 180 lens and leave everything as it was before. The fact that the 180 has such a long working distance from the macro subject meant that I could change the lens without disturbing the scene being shot.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2mcdgew.jpg Note 1.4:1
http://i43.tinypic.com/ngeyyb.jpg Note 1:1

http://i40.tinypic.com/2znsjyv.jpg Shells 1.4:1
http://i41.tinypic.com/ojgm1h.jpg Shells 1:1

Dunno about other browsers but if you're using Firefox 3 then clicking on each link opens it in a new tab so you can flick between them to compare.

IQ seems not to be adversely affected by the extender (similar experience to use with the 70-200 telephoto) so I'll have to play with this combo some more in future.

[edit] Seems that the image hosting site doesn't allow the full resolution image as they have scaled to 55% of the original. Still gives you a good representation of what the originals looked like though.

Thanks, that is fairly impressive, the lens and TC are obviously well matched.

[Matt-l]

I use the 100mm 2.8 for now, tubes might be in the works soon.

[wesjr]

I use my Sigma 180 mm f/3.5 HSM most of the time. It's a very sharp lens for the money. The color and contrast on this lens are excellent IMO.

My Canon 100- 400 f/4.5- 5.6 works as a macro when I use my two extension tubes 12mm and 25 mm. I also like using my Nikon 5T, 6T close up lenses on the 100- 400 IS. This makes this zoom very versatile. The resulting images are surprising...
__________________
Charlie Wesley
St. Augustine Beach, FL

[J-BO]

i use the canon 100mm 2.8, i have gotten great shots with it. a couple weeks after buying it, i had to get some extension tuebes. now i want the mpe 65,macro is so addicting, but i dont think i would get rid of my 100mm.

[leoni]

hello!


what do you recommend between tamron 90 and tokina 100mm?

in my coudntry tokina is less expensive with ( 50 euro) and the built quality is higher.

i want to use this lens for macro and flowers ( the AF wouldn't so important.


thanks

[Mazu]

Definitely the Tokina if it is that much cheaper, I really like mine.

[clupica]

None actually; or more precisely a Nikon 55mm f/2.8 on a Nikon D80. But I've seen the light and my 5D Mark II with a Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro has been ordered and will be here this week (I hope).

Charlie

[yogestee]

I use the Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Dii Macro.. I don't do a lot of macro work but as a portrait lens it's outstanding..

[unclokie]

I have the Tokina and I love it!

Otis

[nesquikstyle]

My 100mm Macro will be in my hand tomorrow....so there goes my vote! :D

[JJD.Photography]

100mm for me!

GF will be ordering the new 100mm f/2.8L IS in the near future :lol:

I can see the 100mm becoming my favorite lens, easily!!

[Ali-Azri]

i vote for mpe 65

[lexanite]

I use Canon EFS 60mm macro, very sharp, also use as portrait lens. Attach to my 40d most of the time.

[Meanderthal]

Just ordered the Tamron 90, my first venture into macro. Bugs, fungus and little flowers look out (though now I'll be more careful that even not to step on you)! The current $60 rebate helps with my budget. If it's good enough for LordV, it's good enough for me, hey?

[beeng]

This needs an "other" vote. I use a nifty fifty (50mm 1.8) with a reverse mount adaptor :P

[C6Shortimer]

Glad to see my Canon 100mm f2.8 is the favorite glass for macro work with this group. :)

[JonSC]

Canon 100mm f2.8! Mine is coming in tomorrow.

[le37]

100mm for me!

GF will be ordering the new 100mm f/2.8L IS in the near future :lol:

I can see the 100mm becoming my favorite lens, easily!!

will someone be adding the L version to the poll?
or should we just click on 100mm 2.8

[wanave]

Hi guys im geting this for xmas what u think ( Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD MACRO 1:2 ) for my 400D ( only a beginner ).

[tancanon58]

100 2.8L IS too.

[tenmikemike]

Just bought a "new" used Canon EF 100mm for my meager collection and I can't wait to really give it a workout. I am amazed at some of the shots I see in the macro forum.

[Digitally_Altered]

replaced my old 100 2.8 for the new 100 2.8 IS, and really liken it...

[racketman]

will someone be adding the L version to the poll?
or should we just click on 100mm 2.8

need to ask the moderator to add that and the Sigma 70mm macro.

[Madweasel]

This poll's been going so long the one I voted for I no longer have and the two I do have I can no longer vote for because I already voted! Maybe it's time to start a fresh one?

[JelleVerherstraeten]

I now switched to the 100L, it's a beauty! I like it more over my old 100mm macro.