Macro lens for flowers

[equetefue]

What would be the best lens for the job ? 75% flowers and 25% skiddish insects

Keep hearing of the canon 100mm f2.8 and Tamron SP90

What are there working distances and how they work in the field.

I will be adding a MR-14EX Ring Lite

[gardengirl13]

I have the 100 and love it, although it is a bit heavy for me I do sometime think about switching for the 60. But sometimes If I'm shooting in a garden I can't get in real close to a flower the 100 will come in handy for the extra reach. I'd rather deal with the weight and have the reach when I need it. Plus with my very friendly chickadees it's a good shrap birding lens too!

[EOS_JD]

When shooting insects close up, I feel that you need a lens that focuses internally. Sigma/Tamron lenses both have an extending barrel when focusing.

All are very sharp though. No bad ones i don't think.

The longer the lens, the greater the working distance to get 1:1. The 100 is a perfect lens though you may find it a little long on a crop body. hence the reason Canon have the 60mm EF-S lens.

All are optically superb.

[ooo]

100mm macro is an awesome lens

[timnosenzo]

Can't say enough good stuff about the Canon 100mm Macro... nicely put together and I'd have to say probably my sharpest lens.

[Recon Photojournalist]

If you want real macro ( i.e. more then 1:1) then MP-E 65mm is a must have. To me , the learning curve is not as bad as TS-E and it stays in my bag whenever I go to a park.

Only down side : macro ring flash is a must.

[Tony-S]

What would be the best lens for the job ? 75% flowers and 25% skiddish insects

Longer is always better. You should also be considering the Sigma 150mm and the two 180mm lenses if your insects are really skittish.

[Wilt]

To get 1:1, you use an extension tube equal to the FL of the lens (assuming lens focused at infinity). The distance from focal plane to the subject would be 4*FL

[Tony-S]

If you want real macro ( i.e. more then 1:1) then MP-E 65mm is a must have.

I've never heard anyone call "real macro" 1:1 or larger. Did you just make that up?

Welcome to the forums. :)

[ben_r_]

Another vote for the Canon, I have one and love it too! Great lens. Everyone that uses mine almost immediately asks how much and starts thinking about getting one!

[ben_r_]

If you want real macro ( i.e. more then 1:1) then MP-E 65mm is a must have. To me , the learning curve is not as bad as TS-E and it stays in my bag whenever I go to a park.

Only down side : macro ring flash is a must.

Well the MP-E 65 isnt cabable of any more "real" macro than the 100mm macro is, its just the next level so to speak. And with regard to the ring light flash, most find that flash to produce very flat images. If your going to drop the money spend a bit more and get the Canon twin light macro flash (MT-24EX). Much nicer.

[gasrocks]

SIgma 150/2.8. Some people think that it is only macro if it is 1:1, not so. Macro is the world from 1/4 life size to 2:1 life size.

[Recon Photojournalist]

Thanks Ben r, was thinking about the mt-24ex but spend too much recently (bought ef 50mm f1.0 and the m80)...so wife is complaining already, lol.

Hello Gasrocks and Tony-S, to my knowledge the definition of "real " macro(aka photomacrography) is life size 1:1 or greater maginication. In the canon ef line up, only MP-E is capable of 1x -5x(stand alone without life size converter or ext tube) as far as I know. The lack of real size can be classified as "close up". Of course with the life size converter, 1:1 can be achieved and therefore can be classified as macro.

http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm#macro

I humbly asked to be corrected if I have a wrong idea about macro and close up.

[pratman64]

60 f/2.8 macro. Awesome.

[Elton Balch]

The Canon 100 mm f/2.8 macro is an exceptionally sharp well made lens that can serve as a very adequate medium telephoto as well as a macro. I tried the extension tube route with my 50 mm f/1.4 but I'd call that less than "user friendly". A dedicated macro is the way to go. Now, let me throw out an of the wall suggestion. The Canon 300 mm f/4 L IS is also an EXCELLENT macro for flowers, and larger insects like butterflies, dragonflies, etc. Since the working distance is close to five feet you may have better success with skittish subjects. Here is a link to sample pictures using the 300 mm f/4.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sample-Pictures.aspx?Equipment=111

Just a random thought....;)

[Quad]

Well I saw flowers and I would go 90 TSE there. It does focus quite close and the focus plane control is very helpful with static objects. Then you had to add insects. A dedicated macro lens is going to probably work better there unless they are big bugs only. Cost that is another matter with the TSE.

[Recon Photojournalist]

With the TS-E , you can use the tilt to control the DOV ( so you can make the flower sharp and everything as a blur ). I don't know about getting real size with TS-E tho and setting up and MF+tilt take longer then MP-E (also tripod + MP)

[Tony-S]

to my knowledge the definition of "real " macro(aka photomacrography) is life size 1:1 or greater maginication.

Well, by that definition, then, all the "1:1" lenses are macro, particularly on crop-sensor cameras (1.6x factor).

[rang]

Tammy 90.

[agedbriar]

Well, by that definition, then, all the "1:1" lenses are macro, particularly on crop-sensor cameras (1.6x factor).


The specified maximum magnification a lens is capable of is the on-sensor magnification of the real-life subject, and doesn't change with sensor size.

However, a 22mm long bug will just fill the frame on a 1.6 crop sensor while it will not fill the frame on an 36mm wide FF sensor if the magnification is the same 1:1 in both instances.

Edit: If you print both the images above to the same print size without cropping, the subject will be larger on the print from the 1.6 crop camera, but that's beyond the macro definition.

And yes, all 1:1 lenses are macro lenses, regardless of sensor size.

[BEEEsH]

The sigma 70mm 2.8 is really sharp as well.

[Meaty0]

What would be the best lens for the job ? 75% flowers and 25% skiddish insects

Keep hearing of the canon 100mm f2.8 and Tamron SP90

What are there working distances and how they work in the field.

I will be adding a MR-14EX Ring Lite


Okay. Well I'm going to throw in a few ideas "out of left field".

You want to shoot mostly flowers? It seems to me that most of the good flowers are out of reach up in the tops of the trees/bushes. With a long lens, you can shoot them.

A fellow photographer shot her flower photos with a 70-300 f:4.0-5.6IS. She got stunningly sharp "close-ups" of the flowers higher up in the trees that the shorter focal length macro users couldn't get near.

I remember reading of a 500mm f/4.0L user who attached extension tubes to his lens (to reduce the minimum focus distance) to get fantastic images of flowers. ARTICLE HERE (http://www.apogeephoto.com/mag1-6/mag2-4jg.shtml)

Don't feel "obliged" to get a macro dedicated lens.

Just for the record, I use a Sigma 150mm f:2.8 Macro for my close-up shots.
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/6519/20070923botanicgardens0rg7.jpg

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/4702/anthuriumpaulstevenspa2.jpg

[DarrinMB]

For your first macro lens I highly recommend the Canon EF100. I had one but "upgraded" to the 180L. Still some of my sharpest and best pics in my collection are from the EF100. Very, very good lens.

[tonylong]

For your first macro lens I highly recommend the Canon EF100. I had one but "upgraded" to the 180L. Still some of my sharpest and best pics in my collection are from the EF100. Very, very good lens.

The 100 can take extension tubes for closer/better than 1:1 magnification as well. I doubt that the EF-S 60 is capable of that.

Not also that the EF 50mm "Compact Macro" is only a 1:2 magnification lens. So, if you were considering it, it would probably be great for flowers but for bugs -- not so much.

[CountryBoy]

When shooting insects close up, I feel that you need a lens that focuses internally. Sigma/Tamron lenses both have an extending barrel when focusing............................


Depends what Sigma lens you're talking about.

[ben_r_]

For your first macro lens I highly recommend the Canon EF100. I had one but "upgraded" to the 180L. Still some of my sharpest and best pics in my collection are from the EF100. Very, very good lens.

Been thinking of upgrading my 100 to the 180L too, but that 180L is just so overpriced IMO. It kills me. If I could find it new for $1000 maybe, but anything more I just think it isnt worth it. I had one for about two weeks and loved it, LOVED the working distance, but still couldnt justify the cost over the 100.

[EOS_JD]

Depends what Sigma lens you're talking about.

You're right. i was thinking of the Sigma 105mm

[timnosenzo]

Now, let me throw out an of the wall suggestion. The Canon 300 mm f/4 L IS is also an EXCELLENT macro for flowers, and larger insects like butterflies, dragonflies, etc. Since the working distance is close to five feet you may have better success with skittish subjects. Here is a link to sample pictures using the 300 mm f/4.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sample-Pictures.aspx?Equipment=111

Just a random thought....;)

Wow, some really nice samples in that gallery!

[Lester Wareham]

What would be the best lens for the job ? 75% flowers and 25% skiddish insects

Keep hearing of the canon 100mm f2.8 and Tamron SP90

What are there working distances and how they work in the field.

I will be adding a MR-14EX Ring Lite

100mm macro is a good choice. All the macro lenses seem good quality, the Canon has the advantage of USM internal focus over the Tamron.

The Canon has a working distance of 143mm at life size. I would think the Tamron is similar.

I would recommend the MT-24EX macro flash over the ring flash for a number of reasons if you can afford it. Briefly, the twin flash gives much more control over lighting, does not cause ring highlights, the focus lights can be controlled from the camera shutter button.

For flowers a tripod will be useful. I hardly ever use a focus rail for flowers however so you can omit that for the moment.

Some more macro background and info here http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Macro_Equipment.htm

[medic-on-fire]

Yet another vote for the Canon 100mm Macro f/2.8...It's probably my sharpest glass.

I LOVE that lens!!! :)