Macro for 1D and 1.3x Crop? 60mm EF-S Baby!

So, I don't want a macro lens longer than 100mm effective focal length. Hence, I have the 60mm EF-S for my xxD camera. However, I wanted to try using the 60mm on the 1D... too bad this gets in the way of the mirror box:

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Oh, I have no idea how this will work on full frame, cause I don't have access to my friend's 5D at this point.

Quite an interesting Post!~DrP.
I think you likely can determine if the lens 'physically' has any issues on the 5D or 1D bodies by testing how far the optics extend past the mount (at all focusing distances) in comparison to a Full Frame Lens.
I am fairly certain that it's NOT going to be an issue with a macro prime!

Definitely Post a test image or two from a 1.3x and a FF body when you get the chance! I suspect the image circle isn't gonna stretch to ff frame with a lot of success, but that central image circle definitely won't be worse!

Richard

drPheta wrote in post #7280867
Oh, I have no idea how this will work on full frame, cause I don't have access to my friend's 5D at this point.

More taken from the 1D MKIII 60mm macro combo.

1/160, f11, Ring Flash focused into near 1:1 ratio. PP'd in ACR with standard settings.

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Interesting. This is relevant to my interests, as I love my 60mm, but full frame cameras are becoming within my reach.

I've heard that extension tubes are able to be used to mount this on a full frame?

Yeah, extension tubes work, too. I'm told the 12mm would work perfectly. However, this would shorten the focus distance, IIRC. So, 1:2 ratio and 1:3 (which is what I use mostly) will bring me in closer to my subject. And my subjects are people... don't think they'd be happy.

drPheta wrote in post #7282226
Yeah, extension tubes work, too. I'm told the 12mm would work perfectly. However, this would shorten the focus distance, IIRC. So, 1:2 ratio and 1:3 (which is what I use mostly) will bring me in closer to my subject. And my subjects are people... don't think they'd be happy.

Can it no longer focus to infinity you mean? or that the magnification changes so to fill the frame with, say, a head shot you need to be closer than you otherwise would without the tube? It has an effect on FOV? Sorry, I have little experience with extension tubes.

With tubes, it will work from MFD to infinity no problem. But if I'm thinking correctly, the 1:1 focus distance with tubes will be shorter than the MFD w/o tubes. So, since I shoot 1:2 and 1:3 (which places me about 6 -10 inches from my subject), using tubes will force me to come closer at that magnification.

Without the tubes, taking off the rear baffle allows me to maintain that magnification and can stil keep about 6-10 inches from my subject. However, w/o the tubes, the mirror will strike rear element near infinity.

If you think you'll be using this lens for macro and portraits, extension tubes are a wise investment. If you're going to simply use the lens for macro shots, removing the rear baffle will work very well for you.

drPheta wrote in post #7282289
With tubes, it will work from MFD to infinity no problem. But if I'm thinking correctly, the 1:1 focus distance with tubes will be shorter than the MFD w/o tubes. So, since I shoot 1:2 and 1:3 (which places me about 6 -10 inches from my subject), using tubes will force me to come closer at that magnification.

Without the tubes, taking off the rear baffle allows me to maintain that magnification and can stil keep about 6-10 inches from my subject. However, w/o the tubes, the mirror will strike rear element near infinity.

If you think you'll be using this lens for macro and portraits, extension tubes are a wise investment. If you're going to simply use the lens for macro shots, removing the rear baffle will work very well for you.

Thanks for that info.

But if an extension tube just shortens the MFD, but retains the same magnification - what is the point o fusing one to begin with? (I mean in a normal setup). I thought the point was that it simply changed MFD, so you could achieve higher than 1:1.

I use my EF-S 60mm with the 5D frequently. I just mount it on a EF 12 II tube but with the lens unmodified. You lose infinity focus and the distance scale isn't right with a tube. The image circle covers full frame just fine with a tube and there is no danger of a mirror strike since the lens is spaced off of the body so far.

With the 12mm tube, the magnification is 0.2 (1:5) when the ring is in the infinity position. At the 1:1 position, magnification is actually 1.28 and of course the focus distance is closer than at 1:1. However for the same actual magnification, the working distance doesn't change much with or without the tube, just the focus ring position is different.

The EF 25 II tube works fine too but the magnification range is 0.44 to 1.61 which is getting pretty high and very close. The nice thing about the 60 is that it is a lot smaller than the 100mm USM macro.

That's what I'm not terribly certain of. Maybe it does increase magnification. If that's the case, then I may benefit from extension tubes. Someone else want to chime in? However, the Canon EF 12II tube is $90. Removing baffle cost me $0.

EDIT: Thanks macroimage. That clarifies things. I guess I was wrong about infinity focus using tubes.

Yah, thanks macroimage (apt title). This does clear things up. I might just go play by holding my lens 12mm from the mount to see.