MACRO LENS Q...

[303]

Any of you guys had experiance using the

70-300/4-5.6 DL MACRO SUPER 2

and the

28-80/3.5-5.6 MACRO HF ??

I heard the 70-300 is noisy and not really all that great, and that the 28-80 is a really nice lens for what it is!

Im pretty much choosing between the two, your knowledge and experiance would be greatly appreciated :D

Thanks !!!!

[Andy_T]

These are two very different lenses, what do you want to use them for?

And ... as far as I know ... they are NOT dedicated macro lenses. They have macro capability, but maybe not what you would get from a macro lens like the Canon EF 100/2.8 Macro or the Sigma 105/2.8 or Tamron 90/2.8 Macro.

Also have a look at this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=80902) for other alternatives...

Best regards,
Andy

[303]

Thanks!

well, im pretty much looking for macro, but not anything too expensive. These have the macro feature. Im into wildlife photography and the like.

The macro on the 28-80 is supposed to be very very good?

Here in South Africa there is quite a difference in price between a "dedicated" macro lense and the ones above.

I am also going to be photographing alot of snakes as i breed reptiles.

[Andy_T]

303 .... what other lenses do you already have?

I don't know about the quality of those lenses, but there are other - even a lot cheaper - alternatives (look at the thread I linked).

Best regards,
Andy

[303]

ok thanks...

I have a canon 28-80mm and an 80-200mm lens.

Thanks

[CyberDyneSystems]

The lenses you list will essentially reproduce the ranges you allready have.. (with the addition of a 200-300mm zoom range..

But.. despite the markings on the lens.. they will not offer you a true "macro" lens...

If your intention is to get a lens for Macro work.. I'd look for something else...

or contemplate a set of extension tubes.. sometimes called "Macro rings" to use with your existing lenses.

[303]

Thanks all i want is to get pretty close to the subject without spending the money on a true "macro" lens. I will get that later.

I'll look into the macro rings.

[Rob612]

Thanks all i want is to get pretty close to the subject without spending the money on a true "macro" lens. I will get that later.

I'll look into the macro rings.

So extension tubes and/or closeup lenses are your way.

[303]

Thanks...

Which is more effective? The extension tubes or close up lenses?

With my 28-80mm lens, would the canon 58mm 250D close up lens be a good extension?

[CyberDyneSystems]

The advantage of the extension tubes is you can use them with ANY lens for lots of different applications...

I love tubes with my 70-200mm lens.. it makes a super macro lens. I bet you'd do well with tubes on your 80-200mm.

[303]

Excellent! Thats news that puts a smile back on my face.

I think i'll go for an extension tube for my 80-200mm like you said.

Thanks

[303]

Dont know much about extension tubes. Busy looking up info on them!

Can you use more than one extension tube on one lens?

Would i be correct in saying that the Canon EF 25 II(2) tube allows for greater magnification than the EF 12 II(2) ??

[sid]

Dont know much about extension tubes. Busy looking up info on them!
Can you use more than one extension tube on one lens?
Would i be correct in saying that the Canon EF 25 II(2) tube allows for greater magnification than the EF 12 II(2) ??
You can stack extension tubes. Kenko makes a set of three tubes that you can stak up in pretty much any combination.
The amount of magnification you get from the extension tube will depend on the focal length of the lens. For example, a 50mm extension tube used with the 50mm macro lens will give you 1:1 magnification. The same tube used on a 100mm lens will give a smaller magnification.
Also, since extension tubes are nothing but hollow tubes (no glass in them), do you really want to spend a lot of money on the Canon ones ? For almost the same price you buy a set of 3 extension tubes made by Keno (or some other manufacturer). This will give you more options too. (nothing wrong with sticking with canon of course :) )
I'd also recommend reading the book "Closeups in nature" by John Shaw. It's an excellent book recommended by many folks here. I just got it recently and it's definitely worth the time to read it. He talks about all the closeup techniques you can use.

[303]

So to obtain a 1:1 magnification with a 200mm lens i would have to add on extension tubes untill i get 200mm. This would cost more than getting an extension tube of 50mm for my 50mm lens to get the same 1:1 magnification. But with the 200mm lens i wouldnt have to be as close to the subject to get the desired 1:1 magnification?

Is this correct?

[sid]

So to obtain a 1:1 magnification with a 200mm lens i would have to add on extension tubes untill i get 200mm. This would cost more than getting an extension tube of 50mm for my 50mm lens to get the same 1:1 magnification. But with the 200mm lens i wouldnt have to be as close to the subject to get the desired 1:1 magnification?

Is this correct?
Yup, thats correct. You are going to need a 200mm extension on a 200mm lens to get 1:1. As for the working distance, I'm not sure how close you'll have to get to the subject. But, a 200mm extension on a 200mm lens would make for a very unweildly combination.
I've never tried this, but you could potentially also look into using a combination of extension tubes as well as close up diopters/filters. Although I doubt that it will be cost effective if you use good quality close up lenses such as the Canon 250D or 500D.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of budget are you looking at ? Take a look at the Canon 100mm macro lens. It gives 1:1 magnification by itself and it's a great lens. Yeah, it's around $469, not exactly cheap....

[303]

Well im just looking for something to get me reasonably close to the subject untill i buy a macro lens. When i do buy a macro lens then the $469 will defenetly be in my price range. But right now its not, hence the extension tubes.

So for the meantime do you think it would be best if i use a 25mm or the kenko tube set (68mm combined) with my 25-80mm lens?

That kenko tube set is pretty much the max i can spend unfortunately... i'll have to import it. I stay in South Africa and the currency conversion is killing me!

[sid]

Well im just looking for something to get me reasonably close to the subject untill i buy a macro lens. When i do buy a macro lens then the $469 will defenetly be in my price range. But right now its not, hence the extension tubes.

So for the meantime do you think it would be best if i use a 25mm or the kenko tube set (68mm combined) with my 25-80mm lens?

That kenko tube set is pretty much the max i can spend unfortunately... i'll have to import it. I stay in South Africa and the currency conversion is killing me!
Yeah, I think that in this case, going with the Kenko tube set might be your best option. You then have the option of 3 tubes and using them in various combinations depending on the situation.

EDIT: 303 check out this tutorial on using extension tubes with a 70-200mm lens:
http://www.natureswildscapes.com/MacroPart3.htm

This will give you an idea about the amount of magnificaiton you can get. Also see the other Macro tutorials here:
http://www.natureswildscapes.com/NW2/index.html

[303]

Thanks for the help man !!

[J Rabin]

303. The lenses you mention are not good for adapting to macro.
Is your 80-200 decent? A f/2.8 or f/4 max aperture. If not, buy something like a used Canon 100-300 with rear element USM focus for under $200. Unheralded good lens for macro conversion.
If you are going to do snakes, do not use extension tubes. You have to get too close (insufficient working distance), lose too much light, and lose ease of focus. Get a 77mm Canon 500D +2 diopter for $140. Mount it using a 58-77mm step up ring, or X-77mm, whatever your lens filter diameter is. Reason for the 77mm? Max flexibility with other lenses and resale value.
You can get almost 0.7x life size with a rig like this, and still use it tripod mounted, which is pretty amazing. The old 80-200 Canon gets you about 0.5 x.

Here's the ref:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/closeup.htm

J.

[RAitch]

So to obtain a 1:1 magnification with a 200mm lens i would have to add on extension tubes untill i get 200mm. This would cost more than getting an extension tube of 50mm for my 50mm lens to get the same 1:1 magnification. But with the 200mm lens i wouldnt have to be as close to the subject to get the desired 1:1 magnification?

Is this correct?

But if it's a 80-200 lens, you'll only need 80mm of extension for 1:1 if it's zoomed all the way out.

You'll be able to get closer to your subject and get a closer image at 80. If you switch to 200mm, you gain working distance but will sacrifice zoom (how large the object apears).

I have the Kenko set and can use it with my 50 1.8 to pull out detail from sand. A pea would fill most of the image. When I use it with my 70-200, I can get gradually farther from the object but it won't be as close to 1:1.

Since it's 3 pieces, you can also create several levels of extension to get varying distances from your subject and thus changing how big the object appears.

I love them, they're great!


Also, with all of the problems I've had with the nifty fifty at 1.8 up close, that seems to go out the window when using these tubes. It seems (so far) that what I see is what I get when it comes to depth of field and focal points. Of course I'll do more testing, but so far I like the extension tubes.

As far as the Kenko tubes "not feeling strong enough" I haven't really found a problem. Even with the 70-200 on the end of all 3, it seems solid enough. That being said, I don't think I'd want to mount that on a tripod and use it for a while... unless I had a collar (which I don't).
The 50mm works great with it and you can get incredibly close. Take the big tube out and you're closer to the same results as the 70-200 with all of them on.