-=TOP TEN=- Which macro lens do you use?

[R-C-G]

Canon 20mm macrophoto lens + auto bellows, but it isn't on the list.

[Vue2aStill]

Originally Posted by Lester Wareham

If you look at your lens manual you will see that for a 500D at 24mm you get magnifications of 0.05-0.11x and at 105mm you get 0.02X-0.34X.

A macro lens like the 100mm macro gives you infinity focus down to 1x and will provide better image quality. 0.34x is probably OK for fairly big flowers and perhaps dragonflies.

Thank you very much for your advice. My budget right now will not permit me to go for a dedicated Macro lens. I guess I will settle for a 500D for now. Do you foresee any other specific issues with the 500D on the 24-105, other than what you mentioned about inifinity focus?
THanks in advance.
-Vue

[Lester Wareham]

Originally Posted by Vue2aStill

Thank you very much for your advice. My budget right now will not permit me to go for a dedicated Macro lens. I guess I will settle for a 500D for now. Do you foresee any other specific issues with the 500D on the 24-105, other than what you mentioned about inifinity focus?
THanks in advance.
-Vue

Other than not having tried it no, best to stop down well which you will probably want to anyway f8 to f11. I use to use closeup filters many years ago sometimes, they were not bad as long as well stopped down, the 500D should be better quality than these. I am not sure if the 500D is multicoated so you might be careful about back-lighting causing flare.

I am sure some instructions come with the 500D but you could test to see how well in performs. I suggest you setup on a tripod at home first (if you can't afford one try resting the camera on a flat surface) and use a target ideally flat with high contrast detail (a bank note) rig the target still and square on and take shots at a range of apertures. Then have a look at the results on the computer and see what aperture range the sharpness is best over. You might want to publish your findings here for others to benefit from.

Good luck.

[Sasquatch41]

I use the Canon 70-200 f2.8 with a set of Kenko extension tubes with very good results.

[sai-gon-xua]

thanks

[Torcidas]

I use canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens and I'm waiting for extension tubes to come to me then will decide will I go and buy MP-E 65+ flash ring or only flash.. I see that beautiful bug colection of photos with MP-E 65 and I fell in love with that lens http://www.beautifulbugs.com

[Lester Wareham]

Originally Posted by Torcidas

I use canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens and I'm waiting for extension tubes to come to me then will decide will I go and buy MP-E 65+ flash ring or only flash.. I see that beautiful bug colection of photos with MP-E 65 and I fell in love with that lens http://www.beautifulbugs.com

Definatly the MP-E but consider the twin flash over the ring flash, lots of operational advantages. Search on this or read http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photog...20Introduction with the MP-E the ability to operate the focus assist lights from the shutter button is a big factor.

[Mathiau]

now i am looking between the MP and the 60... i really want 1-5 but for an extra $600 vs 1:2

[Lester Wareham]

Originally Posted by Mathiau

now i am looking between the MP and the 60... i really want 1-5 but for an extra $600 vs 1:2

Hmm, if you mean the EF-S 60 then that is only 1:1 on its own. 100mm + 68mm stack of tubes gives about 2:1, the EF-S will give a bit more but with less working distance.

So at 1:1 working distances are:

EF-S 60 : 86mm
EF 100 : 143mm
MP-E 65: 101mm

The 100mm and the MP-E are the classic choice for bug photography IMHO, specially on APS-C cameras.

[mypoppy31]

I dont use a lens, I use the Kenko extension tubes. I really like the results using the tubes. I had intended to buy the Canon 100 2.8 Macro lens, but decided on the Kenko instead. Much less expensive than the Canon Macro lens to be sure. The only problem I'm having using the Kenko tubes is focusing which is due to my inexperience with the tubes. Can only hope that I improve on the focusing problem.

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=SalPedi

[racketman]

Originally Posted by Torcidas

I use canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens and I'm waiting for extension tubes to come to me then will decide will I go and buy MP-E 65+ flash ring or only flash.. I see that beautiful bug colection of photos with MP-E 65 and I fell in love with that lens http://www.beautifulbugs.com

had a look at his 'best' gallery and have to say his lighting is too uneven or harsh in most cases - makes me wonder if he has diffused his twin lights.

[gerrym7]

Originally Posted by racketman

had a look at his 'best' gallery and have to say his lighting is too uneven or harsh in most cases - makes me wonder if he has diffused his twin lights.

I read his "how to" section because I'm a complete newbie at all this. I bought my first D-SLR (Canon 40D) about 2 months ago, and the Sigma 150mm Macro 2 weeks ago, and joined this forum yesterday. Needless to say, I'm still a little confused - especially about using a teleconverter to increase focal length and effective magnification.

Am I correct to say that a 2X teleconverter does not change or increase the minimum focusing distance, and that's why magnification would be increased to 2:1? But it would allow 1:1 with twice the old distance because of the increased focal length?

He also states that using a 2X teleconverter will result in 2 stops of light reduction, but that it doesn't matter since you stop down anyway for increased DOF. This means that although the 2X will decrease the light - you get 2 stops worth of increased DOF as a bonus? For some reason I figured that a teleconverter would just reduce the light, but you'ld still be stuck with the f/2.8 equivelant depth of field. I hope I'm reading this right...

[Madweasel]

Originally Posted by gerrym7

I read his "how to" section because I'm a complete newbie at all this. I bought my first D-SLR (Canon 40D) about 2 months ago, and the Sigma 150mm Macro 2 weeks ago, and joined this forum yesterday. Needless to say, I'm still a little confused - especially about using a teleconverter to increase focal length and effective magnification.

Am I correct to say that a 2X teleconverter does not change or increase the minimum focusing distance, and that's why magnification would be increased to 2:1? But it would allow 1:1 with twice the old distance because of the increased focal length?

He also states that using a 2X teleconverter will result in 2 stops of light reduction, but that it doesn't matter since you stop down anyway for increased DOF. This means that although the 2X will decrease the light - you get 2 stops worth of increased DOF as a bonus? For some reason I figured that a teleconverter would just reduce the light, but you'ld still be stuck with the f/2.8 equivelant depth of field. I hope I'm reading this right...

The depth of field thing cancels out, because you're effectively at a smaller aperture, but you're also at a longer focal length. At macro distances, DOF is related to magnification alone. Being closer with a shorter lens is just the same as being further away with a longer lens. If the subject is at 1:2 or 1:1 or whatever, the DOF will be the same at the same aperture on either lens combination.

[Lester Wareham]

Originally Posted by gerrym7

I read his "how to" section because I'm a complete newbie at all this. I bought my first D-SLR (Canon 40D) about 2 months ago, and the Sigma 150mm Macro 2 weeks ago, and joined this forum yesterday. Needless to say, I'm still a little confused - especially about using a teleconverter to increase focal length and effective magnification.

Am I correct to say that a 2X teleconverter does not change or increase the minimum focusing distance, and that's why magnification would be increased to 2:1? But it would allow 1:1 with twice the old distance because of the increased focal length?

He also states that using a 2X teleconverter will result in 2 stops of light reduction, but that it doesn't matter since you stop down anyway for increased DOF. This means that although the 2X will decrease the light - you get 2 stops worth of increased DOF as a bonus? For some reason I figured that a teleconverter would just reduce the light, but you'ld still be stuck with the f/2.8 equivelant depth of field. I hope I'm reading this right...

The thing you do need to watch with teleconverters is if they are not reporting ones, or don't report with the lens (ie when you fit the teleconverter the lens max apature is the same as without it).

If this is the case you need to remember the f-stop you set is actual 2 stops smaller. It is important to to set the f-stop too small to avoid diffraction softening.

Also for high magnification (> 1X) you should use wider f-stops for the same reason.

DOF can be caculated, it does not depend on focal length but on magnification and a property of the lens called pupilary magnification. In SLR lenses pupilary magnification is associated with ocal length.

More in these topics on one of my rambling pages
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photog...ro_Photography
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photog...tm#Diffraction

[DigitalSpecialist]

I use the MPE65, and a 50-1.2 with extension rings.