comparison of lenses MPE vs the world!

[ceriltheblade]

i wasn't sure how to look for this one, so apologies if the subject has been already broached:

has anyone compared the images that they get at 1:1 between one of the regular macro lenses (canon 60, sigma 70, whatever 90, canon 100 etc) and the 1:1 of the mpe?

and also the 2:1 of the lens with a full set of tubes vs 2:1 on the mpe?

i know that i have spoken about getting the mpe - and i have almost saved all i need for it....but just interested...

[Lester Wareham]

Originally Posted by ceriltheblade

i wasn't sure how to look for this one, so apologies if the subject has been already broached:

has anyone compared the images that they get at 1:1 between one of the regular macro lenses (canon 60, sigma 70, whatever 90, canon 100 etc) and the 1:1 of the mpe?

and also the 2:1 of the lens with a full set of tubes vs 2:1 on the mpe?

i know that i have spoken about getting the mpe - and i have almost saved all i need for it....but just interested...

I did this some time ago but does not answer your whole question
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photog...acro/index.htm


There is also this
http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools

[ceriltheblade]

Lester, thanks so much for the links! They both were an amazing read! And the comparison you authored was obviously a lot of work! Way to go! I am trying to decide if my tastes in macro photography get as low as a couple mm and therefore warrant my "want" of the mpe. There is no doubt that it is an amazing lens.

I wonder if nikon macro users ever convert it to their system since it is so unique and that it is a manual focus lens.....

Thanks again

[Lester Wareham]

The MPE is a different way of working compared to the 100 I find, you tend to be looking for much smaller subjects in a smaller area. Flash is advisable with the MP-E.

I suspect Nikon users still use the traditional bellows and manual macro focus lenses that Canon users used in the days of the FD system. Bellows are easy to damage in the field but high end sets often have tilt movements which can be an aid. Personally I preferer the speed and convenience of the MP-E.

[LordV]

Comparison shots i did at 1.5:1 a while ago http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...E-65+sigma+105

Brian v.

[Techuser]

Is there any DOF related difference?
I don't know why but most of the shots I see on the MPE seems to have a better DOF than what I'd expect

[LordV]

Originally Posted by Techuser

Is there any DOF related difference?
I don't know why but most of the shots I see on the MPE seems to have a better DOF than what I'd expect

No- DOF is just dependant on the aperture and magnification.
Remember though that people are more likely to start focus stacking with MPE-65 high mag shots
brian v.

[Overread]

I did a rough test between my MPE, Sigma 70mm and 150mm here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2453447...7623359678512/

fullsize versions are accessible.

Also a rest of the MPE at varying magnifications and apertures
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2453447...7623350445656/

And I'd also recommend looking at John Hallmens test which goes far to compare the MPE to other high magnification setups.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallmen/4320502042/

[gmillerf]

Originally Posted by LordV

Remember though that people are more likely to start focus stacking with MPE-65 high mag shots

^^What he said. I think what you're seeing is the result of the price of the MP-e being a barrier to entry. Only dedicated people will buy the MP-e, as opposed to a $5 reverse ring or a lower end macro lens that lots of people buy to play around with. So grabbing photos at random you might get the impression that the MP-e is flat out better, but you can get some great photos with the less expensive equipment the MP-e just makes it easier. But I can speak from experience and say it's really easy to take crappy photos with the MP-e too , I just don't brag about it.