Macro?

[inmotion]

What macro lens would you recommend for an amateur/starting photographer? I've gotten some good macro-type shots with my zoom lens, but realize could do better with a macro. However, since I know next-to-nothing about macro, I figured this would be a good place to ask and receive an education! :) I have a Canon 30D.

[jr_senator]

Canon's 100mm f/2.8 macro. A fine lens that is not too expensive for many.

[gasrocks]

What lenses do you already own? Budget? What will you be taking macro pix of? I'd suggest getting some ext. tubes first to use with what you already have, perhaps.

[MaDProFF]

I also use a canon 100mm 2.8, many also recommend the Sigma 105mm, difference is personal opinion I think, and maybe price

[Lester Wareham]

What macro lens would you recommend for an amateur/starting photographer? I've gotten some good macro-type shots with my zoom lens, but realize could do better with a macro. However, since I know next-to-nothing about macro, I figured this would be a good place to ask and receive an education! :) I have a Canon 30D.

Generally the best all rounder macro focal length is 100mm, I would recommend the Canon 100mm which also doubles as an excellent ordinary telephoto prime for you.

Difficult to say much more without knowing what body and lens you have and what sort of macro shots you want to make but here is some background info http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Macro_Equipment.htm

[inmotion]

Yes, price is definitely (and unfortunately) a large factor.

Lenses I have:

Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 (non-Macro, older version)
Canon EF 100-300
Canon EF 35-70

[gasrocks]

Yes, a set of ext. tubes first.

[inmotion]

Ok, why ext. tubes? And can someone explain how they work/what they do?

[John_B]

inmotion,
I also agree with the others about the Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro lens. As you can see in this poll -=TOP TEN=- Which macro lens do you use? <-click to see (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=160960) it is used by the majority of macro shooters :)

Extension tubes work by moving the lens further away from the sensor/film which makes the magnification go up but also needs subject closer to the lens.

However a true macro lens like the Canon 100mm f/2.8 will give better edge to edge results and more room between subject and lens, which makes it easier for lighting the subject.

[Lester Wareham]

Yes as John said perhaps a set of tubes first then, they will still be useful if you later add a macro lens for getting more magnification. They will tend to work better and more easily with prime lenses rather than zoom lenses but they will work with the zooms.

The amount of magnification you get is M=E/F for a lens set to infinity, where E is the length of the extension tube and F is the lens focal length. So the shorter the focal length or the longer the extension the more magnification you get. Of course the more magnification you have or the shorter the lens focal length the closer you need to be to the object.

Magnification is figured as M=Size_of_image_on_sensor/Size_of_object. So if you want an object 35mm long to fill the frame of an APS-C camera you need M=22/35=0.63, or 0.63X or 1:1.6. So using your 70-200mm lens at say 100mm you will need to add E=MxF=0.63x100=63mm or extension.

ta-da! ;)

[Tee Why]

Cheapest real macro lens is the Sigma 50mm f2.8 at about $270 or so.
Canon ef-s 60mm and most other 100mm ish macros all cost about $390 or so.

If price is a concern and you aren't shooting skittish bugs, the Sigma 50mm or the Canon 60mm may do fine. If you need to be further away from the subject, Sigma has a 70m and a 105mm macro, Tamron has a 90mm macro, Tokina has a 100mm macro, and Canon has a 100mm macro.

[MaDProFF]

Actually, I forgot you were using a 30D, 100mm is 160mm on a 30D, that can cause a problem if you are short of space. The I once owned 60mm EFS is a great lens as well,

[ajayclicks]

Tamron 90mm. Cheaper than the Canon, and an excellent lens

[number six]

I have the Canon 60mm f/2.8 macro. It's very sharp and has a very flat field (important for documents, doesn't matter for bugs).

Great lens and 60mm is a convenient focal length on a 1.6 crop camera like the 30D.

-js

[inmotion]

Just want to take pics of butterflies, flowers, up close details of animals/pets, etc.

I just recently purchased the Sigma (used), so need to be careful about not spending a whole lot on another lens right away.

Just looking real quickly at B&H it appears the Tamron is appx same $ as the Canon or maybe I'm not looking at the right things.

Still really not sure about extension tubes - all that math confuses me! lol

[cedm]

Still really not sure about extension tubes - all that math confuses me! lol

InMotion: this is what extension tubes do: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=148797

Even if you go for a dedicated macro lens, you can still use the extension tubes to further increase magnification.

[inmotion]

Will those tubes work with say the Sigma 70-200? How does it affect focusing? Still have AF? Wish I knew someone who had a couple macro lenses I could try out - just to know what length I really want/need - ie 50 or 60 or 100 or 105 or ?

[inmotion]

So what ext. tubes are best deal for the money? And would work with my camera/lenses?

[Lester Wareham]

Will those tubes work with say the Sigma 70-200? How does it affect focusing? Still have AF? Wish I knew someone who had a couple macro lenses I could try out - just to know what length I really want/need - ie 50 or 60 or 100 or 105 or ?

So what ext. tubes are best deal for the money? And would work with my camera/lenses?

Any tubes that are Canon EF fit will work, but make sure they have the electrical connections in them to operate the stop down. Kenko are a very popular brand although I had problems with them not locking security and switched to Canon ones, however most people seem to be happy with the Kenkos.

If you have electrical contacts the the AF will still operate, it may or may not be accurate, the 100mm macro is normally accurate on AF but the normal technique is a special form of manual focus, read the background info I linked you in an earlier message. This link also explains the trade-off for focal length and why 100mm is a good choice.

[inmotion]

A quick look on net at ext. tubes - some are $15, some are $100. I don't particularly want to spend $100 on it as I could put that money towards an actual macro lens. So how do you know what brand will work?

[Lester Wareham]

A quick look on net at ext. tubes - some are $15, some are $100. I don't particularly want to spend $100 on it as I could put that money towards an actual macro lens. So how do you know what brand will work?

As I said most people use the Kenko ones, I doubt a $15 pair have electrical contacts. You could also look through the macro forum.

[jr_senator]

...100mm is 160mm on a 30D...

Huh? I had a 20D and my 100mm lens was 100mm on it. It's 100mm on my 1D3, and I do believe it would be 100mm on a 1Ds3 as well. Maybe someone with a 100mm lens and a 1Ds2 0r 3 could chime in on this.

[Lester Wareham]

Actually, I forgot you were using a 30D, 100mm is 160mm on a 30D, that can cause a problem if you are short of space. The I once owned 60mm EFS is a great lens as well,

Huh? I had a 20D and my 100mm lens was 100mm on it. It's 100mm on my 1D3, and I do believe it would be 100mm on a 1Ds3 as well. Maybe someone with a 100mm lens and a 1Ds2 0r 3 could chime in on this.

God this one goes around and around doesn't it.

Yes your right a 100mm lens is always 100mm whatever it is mounted on. The focal length is a physical property of the lens that can not change.

However mounting the lens on a smaller format means you are only using the centre section of the image, so people talk of a focal length multiplier to indicate that the field of view is reduced, so on APS-C a 100mm provides the same angle of view as a 160mm lens would on a 35mm camera.

So with that out of the way I think the thrust of MaDProFF's comment is that on a crop camera you will be further away to fill the frame with a an object than you would be with a 35m camera using the same lens.

I don't think this is a big issue with the 100mm unless you are doing document copy work, anything longer than 100mm like 150 or 180mm and it can start becoming a problem on occasion with some subjects in some circumstances. Generally the extra working distance with the 100mm is an advantage for easy of lighting and a less distracting background due to flattened perspective.

[amfoto1]

Kenko extension tubes in the set are probably the best overall value: Three tubes (12mm, 20mm and 36mm) that make for seven possible combinations. About $160 new, a little cheaper used if you can find them. Individual Canon tubes cost $90 to $125. Individual Kenko tubes cost less, but I don't recall how much less. There might be cheaper ones, such as Adorama's own brand: Pro Optic (if they offer ext. tubes for Canon at all).

Avoid the $15 or $20 ones. They are difficult if not impossible to use, without the electronic lens-to-camera connections.

I use the Kenko set and a couple Canon 12mm and a Canon 25mm. Not much difference in the field, that I've noticed. Some say the Kenko are plastic and the Canon are metal, but I can't tell the difference. Some say the Kenko can flex under the weight of a heavy lens and/or camera. I seldom use more than one tube, so really haven't noticed this either (and I have used the 36mm with 300/2.8 IS and 30D with a BG-E2 on it).

I notice you only list zoom lenses in your signature. Tubes generally work best with prime lenses, not zooms. Must admit I've managed some pretty good shots with my 70-200/2.8 IS and tubes, though. So, they might work fine with your lens, but I've never tried it. Otherwise, extension tubes are very hand to have. There's been at least one set of them in every camera bag I've carried for the past 20 years or so.

A macro lens will always be more convenient and give higher image quality. In my Canon kit I have the 100/2.8 USM and 180/3.5. The latter is really primarily a full frame lens, it's too long on a crop sensor camera (too long at around 280mm effective on a croper, needs stopping down to have any sort of depth of field, thus slower shutter speeds, and thus much harder to hand hold).

For me, 50mm is too short on full frame, and even marginal on crop sensor cameras. Too close to critters might scare them away, cast an unwanted shadow on them, or get you bit or stung. I have and use some 50mm macro in other systems, and 45mm TS-E with my Canon for near macro table top product shots. As far as I'm concerned, these are copy and static subject lenses, not wildlife, butterfly and bug lenses.

The Canon 50/2.5 is capable of 1:2 by itself. You need an additional matched adapter to get to 1:1. It's starting to get pretty pricey by the time you add the adapter. The adapter has optics in it, so in a sense is a macro extension/teleconverter combination.

Plain extension tubes, like the Kenko and Canon, have no optics in them and thus don't "mess" with your lens' optical qualities too much.

Extension tubes with some non-macro primes (and zooms) can exhibit varying degrees of softness in the corners and even some light falloff/vignetting. These characteristics can often be used to good advantage in macro photos, though.

90 to 135mm macros are probably most versatile, when you have only one.

The Canon 100/2.8 USM does act as nice telephoto, too, especially on 1.6X crop cameras like yours and mine. Just use the focus limiting switch and it's AF is fast enough for many things. The older non-USM 100/2.8 is sometimes found used for a lot less, but is slower focusing.

Focus speed is not much of an issue with macro work itself. AF isn't much help at macro magnifications. Eventually you will probably find yourself turning it off and using the technique most experienced macro shooters do: Moving back and forth closer and farther from the subject until focus is achieved. There are "focusing stages" and "long lens plates" for just this purpose, when using a tripod. Or, use a monopod and lean into and away from the subject to focus.

http://photos4.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/9/b/5/d/event_3459773.jpeg

Canon 100/2.8 USM on 30D, at non-macro distances.

http://photos3.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/d/7/8/8/event_1975176.jpeg

Canon 100/2.8 USM on 10D, at macro distances.

http://photos4.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/d/7/8/1/event_1975169.jpeg

Canon 300/2.8 IS with 36mm extension for closer focus, on 30D.

Some older photos (only low res thumbnails are currently online, I'm afraid):

http://hometown.aol.com/amfoto3/amfoto3005002.jpg

Tamron SP 90mm f2.5 Macro lens on Konica FT-1, Ektachrome 100VS film.

http://hometown.aol.com/amfoto3/amfoto3005013.jpg

Upper image, Canon 180/3.5 Macro lens, EOS-3, MT-24EX Twinlite, Velvia 50 film.

Lower image, Canon 70-200/2.8 IS with 25mm extension, EOS-3, 550EX flash, Velvia 50 film.

[Sfordphoto]

I'm seriously thinking about the 100mm macro, but I also want it to do double work as a portrait lens. 60mm macro wouldn't be bad for portraits, but I prefer more perspective compression.

[inmotion]

So since I have zooms, I'd be better off waiting and buying the 100mm macro rather than spending $ on extension tubes?

[jr_senator]

I'm seriously thinking about the 100mm macro, but I also want it to do double work as a portrait lens. 60mm macro wouldn't be bad for portraits, but I prefer more perspective compression.

Why more compression? It's not a "natural" view. Features don't look real life like, they are distorted.

[Larry Weinman]

I own the Canon 100 f 2.8 and trhe Canon 180 f 3.5 macro lenses. More then you want to spend. The beautiful thing about macro lenses is that they are all good. I used to have the Tamron 90mm and the Sigma 180mm, Very good lenses. I have heard good things about the Sigma 105 and 150mm lenses and also te Canon 60mm lenses. Even Vivitar makes a good macro. For taking photos of flowers etc. a macro in the range of 100mm would be a good choice. For insects, a macro in the range of 150-180mm would give you more working distance but it would be heavier and harder to hand hold.