Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 02 Jan 2018 (Tuesday) 20:35
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Canon EF-S 35mm f2.8 macro IS STM lens question

 
Dannydoo
Senior Member
Dannydoo's Avatar
354 posts
Joined May 2007
Chicago, IL
Jan 02, 2018 20:35 |  #1

I am looking to buy a nice lens for dental photography.
I'm currently using a 6D with 50mm + extension tube + yonguo ring flash. I find it highly inconvenient to use in clinic setting so I'm planning to buy a rebel series + dedicated macro lens.
If you own this lens, would you be kind enough to see if this lens can capture a person's smile (corner to corner of the mouth) at what distance, is the ring light strong enough to light up the teeth at that distance, how are you liking the quality? etc.
Thank you very much in advance.


Daniel
6D
17-40L | 50mm f/1.4 | 24-70L | 135L | Tamron 70-300mm VC

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,028 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Post has been last edited 16 days ago by davesrose. 3 edits done in total.
Jan 02, 2018 21:40 |  #2

I'm a medical illustrator/animator that's worked with dental residents. I would think that extension tubes are quite cumbersome in getting too close. I would think the 6D a better all around camera for being able to do client portraits (I've seen hospital settings where staff photographer will have portrait studio for head shots for patients). You can get more accurate perspective of the mouth with a longer FL. I see that Canon has a kit for the 100mm 2L macro (it would provide better perspectives close up, and is a great portrait lens as well)...and MR-14EX ring flash. Or there's 3rd party flashes as well.

Canon MR-14EX II Macro Ring Lite (with 100mm IS in frequently bought) (external link)


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Patrick ­ H
Member
Joined Aug 2013
Jan 03, 2018 01:23 |  #3

About six inches. Light is strong enough. Agree 100 macro on ff is a better proposition.


5D mkIV | 35Lii | 135L | + some zooms.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Dannydoo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Dannydoo's Avatar
354 posts
Joined May 2007
Chicago, IL
Jan 05, 2018 15:10 |  #4

davesrose wrote in post #18532141 (external link)
I'm a medical illustrator/animator that's worked with dental residents. I would think that extension tubes are quite cumbersome in getting too close. I would think the 6D a better all around camera for being able to do client portraits (I've seen hospital settings where staff photographer will have portrait studio for head shots for patients). You can get more accurate perspective of the mouth with a longer FL. I see that Canon has a kit for the 100mm 2L macro (it would provide better perspectives close up, and is a great portrait lens as well)...and MR-14EX ring flash. Or there's 3rd party flashes as well.

Canon MR-14EX II Macro Ring Lite (with 100mm IS in frequently bought) (external link)


Patrick H wrote in post #18532259 (external link)
About six inches. Light is strong enough. Agree 100 macro on ff is a better proposition.

Thanks for your tips. I really appreciate it.


Daniel
6D
17-40L | 50mm f/1.4 | 24-70L | 135L | Tamron 70-300mm VC

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,948 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Jan 05, 2018 15:20 |  #5

DOF on a dSLR (crop or FF) is never going to be deep enough for dedicated dental work. Specialty gear exists.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
MakisM1's Avatar
Joined Dec 2011
Houston
Jan 05, 2018 16:36 |  #6

Bassat wrote in post #18534255 (external link)
DOF on a dSLR (crop or FF) is never going to be deep enough for dedicated dental work. Specialty gear exists.

Well, your statement intrigued me. My doctor, who is an accomplished photographer (his practice is full of prints from his photographic wanderings, and they are good) is using a 70D (IIRR, crop anyway and is not ancient). Is he that sloppy?

I have a crop (60D) and a regular flash (not ring), so I thought what the heck, I'll try a DOF test from 2.5-3 ft away shooting the ever handy slanted ruler (yeah, I checked with DOFMaster first).

I used my good for nothing superzoom 18-200 at an ever so soft f22 at 100mm or thereabouts...

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Ok, it isn't pretty, will not go to a publication in a dentist's conference regarding digital photography and dental recording, BUT

I get 2-2.5 inches of reasonable sharpness and I posit (no, I am not sticking the ruler in my mouth:-D) that it is adequate DOF for seeing all my fillings in reasonable detail!

PS: The units are in mm in deference to my previous engineering life (TBH I couldn't find a ruler with Good Christian Units...  :p ).

Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Bassat's Avatar
6,948 posts
Joined Oct 2015
Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Jan 05, 2018 17:08 |  #7

MakisM1 wrote in post #18534312 (external link)
Well, your statement intrigued me. My doctor, who is an accomplished photographer (his practice is full of prints from his photographic wanderings, and they are good) is using a 70D (IIRR, crop anyway and is not ancient). Is he that sloppy?

I have a crop (60D) and a regular flash (not ring), so I thought what the heck, I'll try a DOF test from 2.5-3 ft away shooting the ever handy slanted ruler (yeah, I checked with DOFMaster first).

I used my good for nothing superzoom 18-200 at an ever so soft f22 at 100mm or thereabouts...

thumbnailHosted photo: posted by MakisM1 in
./showthread.php?p=185​34312&i=i134117831
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

Ok, it isn't pretty, will not go to a publication in a dentist's conference regarding digital photography and dental recording, BUT

I get 2-2.5 inches of reasonable sharpness and I posit (no, I am not sticking the ruler in my mouth:-D) that it is adequate DOF for seeing all my fillings in reasonable detail!

PS: The units are in mm in deference to my previous engineering life (TBH I couldn't find a ruler with Good Christian Units...  :p ).

I agree with you about 2-2.5" reasonable DOF. Looks like about 3cm of good DOF, and that is a f/22. Consider that better IQ is available with dedicated oral photography gear. Consider the size of the camera you are using and the distance it is deployed from. You are never going to get whole-mouth photos with that setup. Something about the size of a soda-straw that can be positioned anywhere in the patient's mouth will be much better suited to the job.

Try using your 60D/18-200 to get good shots of the posterior surfaces of the upper front teeth. Seems to me a dentist wanting to photograph teeth would want to use the best tool for the job. If my dentist tries the get his 1DX/100L/MT-24EX in my mouth, I'm leaving.


Tom

LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
MakisM1's Avatar
Joined Dec 2011
Houston
Post has been edited 13 days ago by MakisM1.
Jan 05, 2018 17:40 |  #8

That's not what they are used for. Most doctors have digital optical probes (for lack of better term) that they use. They take video, photos and include lighting in their fiber optic pipeline.

The photos are used to provide a complete record of the mouth (the landscape version to the probe's portraits).

I haven't seen a film x-ray in a dentist's office for at least a decade... Everything is digital nowadays.

Even my 90-yo mother's dentist... in Greece... has a 24 inch monitor practically in your face. When he doesn't use it for visualization, he puts on news sites to keep you distracted. The trouble is that occasionally he gets distracted and ...nothing happens for a minute or two. Kinda like a senior moment...:-P Then he mumbles something about the news and turns the drill on again...


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,028 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Post has been edited 13 days ago by davesrose.
Jan 05, 2018 21:55 |  #9

The OP was talking about taking photos of the entire mouth: a longer telephoto macro will let you stay further away from the patient. And when it comes to most dental imaging: apart from Xrays and optical gear directly tied to the computer station, the dental school I was tied to used Canon Rebels for their general camera (where photos are usually mouth quadrants).


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
ed rader's Avatar
22,691 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Joined May 2005
silicon valley
Jan 06, 2018 01:05 |  #10

I have the lens and I like it a lot. I use it with 80d and its sharp wide open. i think the light works very well once you understand it's not really a ring light. if you are concerned about DOF it seems a shorter lens on crop sensor would be a better choice than longer macro on FF.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, 430exII, gitzo 3542, markins Q10, kirk, really right stuff

LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2010
Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
Jan 09, 2018 06:03 |  #11

Given that in this case you are looking for the same reproduction ratio in the final output in all cases, the DoF will be determined solely by the ƒ ratio used. Everything else will cancel out one way or the other.

What will change, based on working distance, is the perspective. So it is the perspective requirements that I would be looking at first, because once you know what working distance is necessary for optimum perspective results, then you can figure out which combinations of body and lens will get you to the desired working distance. You then just need to know what ƒ ratio will get you your required Dof.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Dannydoo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Dannydoo's Avatar
354 posts
Joined May 2007
Chicago, IL
Post has been edited 3 days ago by Dannydoo.
Jan 15, 2018 19:43 |  #12

Bassat wrote in post #18534255 (external link)
DOF on a dSLR (crop or FF) is never going to be deep enough for dedicated dental work. Specialty gear exists.


Bassat wrote in post #18534343 (external link)
I agree with you about 2-2.5" reasonable DOF. Looks like about 3cm of good DOF, and that is a f/22. Consider that better IQ is available with dedicated oral photography gear. Consider the size of the camera you are using and the distance it is deployed from. You are never going to get whole-mouth photos with that setup. Something about the size of a soda-straw that can be positioned anywhere in the patient's mouth will be much better suited to the job.

Try using your 60D/18-200 to get good shots of the posterior surfaces of the upper front teeth. Seems to me a dentist wanting to photograph teeth would want to use the best tool for the job. If my dentist tries the get his 1DX/100L/MT-24EX in my mouth, I'm leaving.


BigAl007 wrote in post #18536922 (external link)
Given that in this case you are looking for the same reproduction ratio in the final output in all cases, the DoF will be determined solely by the ƒ ratio used. Everything else will cancel out one way or the other.

What will change, based on working distance, is the perspective. So it is the perspective requirements that I would be looking at first, because once you know what working distance is necessary for optimum perspective results, then you can figure out which combinations of body and lens will get you to the desired working distance. You then just need to know what ƒ ratio will get you your required Dof.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #18536922 (external link)
Given that in this case you are looking for the same reproduction ratio in the final output in all cases, the DoF will be determined solely by the ƒ ratio used. Everything else will cancel out one way or the other.

What will change, based on working distance, is the perspective. So it is the perspective requirements that I would be looking at first, because once you know what working distance is necessary for optimum perspective results, then you can figure out which combinations of body and lens will get you to the desired working distance. You then just need to know what ƒ ratio will get you your required Dof.

Alan

DOF is not an issue for the type of dental photos I take. Even at around f/8.0 it is deep enough to capture what I need.
Its always going to be either facial view of front teeth or top view(with intraoral mirror) of back teeth with the plane of occlusion being almost perpendicular to the lens. Occasional pre-op and post-op single tooth shot.
Current intraoral cams will never out perform DSLR and their cost is just ridiculous for what they are so thats out of the question.
I have been using my current setup (6D, 50mm, extension tube and ring flash) and it takes great pictures but its definitely in your face type of set up. I'm not going to continue to use my personal DSLR so I was looking to get a crop body + dedicated macro + possible twin flash.


Daniel
6D
17-40L | 50mm f/1.4 | 24-70L | 135L | Tamron 70-300mm VC

LOG IN TO REPLY
Dannydoo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Dannydoo's Avatar
354 posts
Joined May 2007
Chicago, IL
Jan 15, 2018 19:49 |  #13

ed rader wrote in post #18534624 (external link)
I have the lens and I like it a lot. I use it with 80d and its sharp wide open. i think the light works very well once you understand it's not really a ring light. if you are concerned about DOF it seems a shorter lens on crop sensor would be a better choice than longer macro on FF.

Thanks for your input. A lot of local camera shops carry 60mm macro lens but none carries 35mm so its really hard to imagine how they are going to perform for the type of pictures I need to take.


Daniel
6D
17-40L | 50mm f/1.4 | 24-70L | 135L | Tamron 70-300mm VC

LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,028 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Jan 15, 2018 21:50 as a reply to Dannydoo's post |  #14

I still think 35mm is too wide for your intended applications. On a crop, the 60mm will let you stay back further and still frame what you need: as will a 100mm macro on your current FF.


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Archibald's Avatar
Joined May 2008
Calgary
Post has been edited 3 days ago by Archibald.
Jan 15, 2018 22:44 as a reply to post 18541962 |  #15

Interesting question. I would have thought the 35mm macro would be ideal, with its built-in ring light. But this website (and others) says 100mm (on a FF camera) is better.
https://www.dentalphot​omaster.com ...00mm-which-one-is-better/ (external link)

Superficially, 100 on FF is like 60 on a crop. But the working distance changes, and you need 100mm for a working distance of around 6".

Hadn't even thought of it, but the patient's breath will probably fog the front element of a lens that is too close - and the 35mm will be close.

This doesn't deal with the lighting issue, though.

You could visit the Bornfeld twins at http://www.dentaltwins​.net/dentalchat/index.​php (external link) and ask their opinion.


Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1,043 views & 2 likes for this thread
Canon EF-S 35mm f2.8 macro IS STM lens question
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.0011 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is TheSandValor
952 guests, 491 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017