Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 22 Mar 2009 (Sunday) 01:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

500D + 200 / 2.8L

 
joe ­ mama
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 22, 2009 01:27 |  #1
bannedPermanent ban

I had a thread on this a while ago -- but it's "expired" so apologies for the new one. I've just one question: what will my minimum and maximum focusing distances be with the 200 / 2.8L + 500D closeup filter (the minimum focusing distance of the bare 200 / 2.8L is 1.5m)?

Thanks!


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Goos
Member
111 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Sweden
     
Mar 22, 2009 07:20 |  #2

I might be wrong but I don't think MFD changes with a crop camera since the MFD is a optical quality and should have nothing to do with the fact that a crop only captures the middle part of the lens because of its smaller sensor. And maximum will be infinity as always?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jim ­ G
I feel thoroughly satisfied
Avatar
12,255 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Australia.
     
Mar 22, 2009 07:27 |  #3

MFD for the lens will not change no matter which camera you put it onto. Check the lens specs. Also read up on how crop factor actually impacts on anything! There's heaps of information (and misinformation) out there. Check some of the stickies here, do a search, hit up Google...


Gear Listhttp://www.codastudios​.com.au (external link) Reviews & Hotlinks: Domke F-3x - Pelican 1510/1514 (external link) & 1610/1614 (external link) - DIY Variable Length OC-E3 - Crumpler 6 Million Dollar Home (external link) - FA-100 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BiPolarBear
Senior Member
Avatar
377 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Location: The Forest City, Canada
     
Mar 22, 2009 09:39 |  #4

I don't think "500D" is a "50D" typo by Joe.
I believe he means the 500D close-up lens attachment.
And sorry Joe, i have the 200 2.8, but not the 500D so can't help.
Hope to see some samples if you have it/get it, as it would be dandy to have in a small bag to have "macro" readily available if needed.
Greg


Best wide angle lens? Two steps backward. Look for the "ah-ha". - Ernst Haas

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Goos
Member
111 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Sweden
     
Mar 22, 2009 11:40 |  #5

Ah, guess we were way off then :D
Why not get some tubes though instead of adding an extra layer of glass?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 22, 2009 12:44 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

BiPolarBear wrote in post #7573462 (external link)
I don't think "500D" is a "50D" typo by Joe.
I believe he means the 500D close-up lens attachment.
And sorry Joe, i have the 200 2.8, but not the 500D so can't help.
Hope to see some samples if you have it/get it, as it would be dandy to have in a small bag to have "macro" readily available if needed.
Greg

Quite right -- my bad in not being specific enough. The thing is that I really love my Sigma 70 / 2.8 macro for macro:

http://www.pbase.com/j​oemama/70macrogallery (external link)

and a lot of the macro pics are anywhere from 1:1 to 1:5. I know the 500D won't give me 1:1, but 1:2 would be good. I just don't want to be locked in the narrow range from 1:2-1:3, for example.

*Sigh*

Maybe I just need my wonderful 150 / 2.8 macro back:

http://www.pbase.com/j​oemama/150macrogallery (external link)

The thing is, as good as it is, I just don't know if I'd use it, given that I have the Sigma 70 / 2.8 macro and 200 / 2.8L. Thus, I thought the 500D closeup filter might be a really good idea for when I just feel the need for long macro.

As for tubes, the reason I'm against that is that I think I don't don't think tubes offer any advantages over the 500D for a 200mm lens. If I'm wrong on this point, I'd be pleased to be corrected.


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Goos
Member
111 posts
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Sweden
     
Mar 22, 2009 12:50 |  #7

Guess the close-up filter would be alot easier to just stick on the lens if you wan't a quick macro shot so it's kinda convenient I guess. I was just thinking about IQ-degradation really but since I didn't even know what the 500D was before you guys pointed it out I'm far from being an expoert on it :D just saying it might be worth looking into I guess (IQ-degradation that is) :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Daniel ­ Browning
Goldmember
1,199 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, WA
     
Mar 23, 2009 01:35 |  #8

Goos wrote in post #7574028 (external link)
Why not get some tubes though instead of adding an extra layer of glass?

For one thing, there is the light loss. For two, there are many times when tubes result in image quality that is superior to a close-up doublet. But there are also many times when the "extra layer of glass" provides superior quality. It depends on the circumstances. Luckily there are lots of folks out there testing varieties of combinations. GIFY, but I can't find info on this combo specifically.

Kind regards,


Daniel

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Daniel ­ Browning
Goldmember
1,199 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, WA
     
Mar 23, 2009 02:17 |  #9

joe mama wrote in post #7572314 (external link)
What will my minimum and maximum focusing distances be with the 200 / 2.8L + 500D closeup filter

Plugging the 200mm f/2.8 specs into the calculator gives me: 700mm minimum focus distance, 1200mm maximum. Subtract ~240mm for working distance. 0.40X maximum reproduction ratio.


Daniel

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 23, 2009 02:24 |  #10
bannedPermanent ban

Daniel Browning wrote in post #7578634 (external link)
Plugging the 200mm f/2.8 specs into the calculator gives me: 700mm minimum focus distance, 1200mm maximum. Subtract ~240mm for working distance. 0.40X maximum reproduction ratio.

Thanks! How'd you calculate that?


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
macroimage
Goldmember
2,169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2007
     
Mar 23, 2009 03:00 |  #11

According to the leaflet that came with the 500D filter, using a EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM and the 500D will give a magnification of 0.57-0.39x. The 0.4x above assumes that you are set to infinity focus. You can get closer. At infinity on the ring, focus will be 500mm from the sensor plane with a 500D filter.

200mm is 5 diopters. A 500D filter is 2 diopters so you get 7 diopters total when you combine the lenses. This gives a 143mm effective focal length with 200mm of extension at infinity. The 57mm of extra extension (200-143) divided into 143mm gives 0.398.


Photo Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 23, 2009 03:31 |  #12
bannedPermanent ban

macroimage wrote in post #7578745 (external link)
According to the leaflet that came with the 500D filter, using a EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM and the 500D will give a magnification of 0.57-0.39x. The 0.4x above assumes that you are set to infinity focus. You can get closer. At infinity on the ring, focus will be 500mm from the sensor plane with a 500D filter.

200mm is 5 diopters. A 500D filter is 2 diopters so you get 7 diopters total when you combine the lenses. This gives a 143mm effective focal length with 200mm of extension at infinity. The 57mm of extra extension (200-143) divided into 143mm gives 0.398.

Thanks a lot for your detailed response! Unfortunately, I am unfamiliar with all the terminology. For example, I've no idea what a "diopter" is (though I can, of course, google it).

So while I'd love a tutorial on what all that means, the immediate concern is what is the closest I can frame with the 200 / 2.8L + 500D (I'm assuming it's 500mm) and what's the furthest I can frame.

Using the expression m ~ FL / (d - FL), where FL represents focal length and d represents subject-sensor distance, I get m ~ 0.67 for d = 500mm, so I'm assuming that the 0.57 you wrote above was a typo?

In addition, solving for d gives d ~ [(1+m) / m] · FL. So, for m=0.67, I get d ~ 500mm and for m = 0.398, I get d ~ 700mm (but I don't know where the m ~ 0.398 figure came from). So, would I be correct in assuming that I can focus only between 500mm and 700mm with a 500D filter on a 200 / 2.8L?

Anyway, thanks for the explanation, even if I don't get it right now. I'm off to bed, so maybe I'll lie awake trying to figure it out rather than sleep. : )


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
macroimage
Goldmember
2,169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2007
     
Mar 23, 2009 03:38 |  #13

joe mama wrote in post #7578826 (external link)
Thanks a lot for your detailed response! Unfortunately, I am unfamiliar with all the terminology. For example, I've no idea what a "diopter" is (though I can, of course, google it).

So while I'd love a tutorial on what all that means, the immediate concern is what is the closest I can frame with the 200 / 2.8L + 500D (I'm assuming it's 500mm) and what's the furthest I can frame.

Using the expression m ~ FL / (d - FL), where FL represents focal length and d represents subject-sensor distance, I get m ~ 0.67 for d = 500mm, so I'm assuming that the 0.57 you wrote above was a typo?

In addition, solving for d gives d ~ [(1+m) / m] · FL. So, for m=0.67, I get d ~ 500mm and for m = 0.398, I get d ~ 700mm (but I don't know where the m ~ 0.398 figure came from). So, would I be correct in assuming that I can focus only between 500mm and 700mm with a 500D filter on a 200 / 2.8L?

Anyway, thanks for the explanation, even if I don't get it right now. I'm off to bed, so maybe I'll lie awake trying to figure it out rather than sleep. : )

A diopter is the reciprocal of the focal length in meters so a 200mm lens is 5 diopters etc. It's just a calculation convenience to avoid all of the 1/f terms.

The close focus limit and magnification won't calculate accurately with the formulae above if you are assuming that the main lens's focal length remains at 200mm as you focus closer. Being an internal focus lens, it loses some focal length toward the close focus limit. 200mm FL is specified at infinity and focal length tolerances of 5% aren't uncommon so it is probably between 190 and 210mm at infinity. Canon's documentation says that you can get 0.57x (not a typo) at the close focus limit. It is less than you calculate because at the close focus limit, the focal length is not 200mm anymore but somewhat less. Your formula isn't considering pupular magnification either which is on telephoto lenses is usually less than 1 and affects the outcome a little.

The classic simple formalae are for single element symmetric thin lenses and this approximation gets stretched a bit too far for complex lenses, especially for telephoto designs where the nodal point is probably in front of the front element.

The fastest way to check is to just photograph a ruler.


Photo Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon ­ Bob
Goldmember
2,063 posts
Likes: 52
Joined May 2007
Location: Poitou-Charentes, France
     
Mar 23, 2009 04:13 as a reply to  @ macroimage's post |  #14

I've got this option so just popped it on to measure it.

Minimum is 560mm and maximum is 700mm....give or take a mm or so.

Bob


1Dx2 (2), 5DSR, 1Ds3, 1D4, 5D2(590nm), 5D2(720nm) EF600 EF400 EF300-II EF300 EF200 EF200-II EF180L EF135L EF100 EF85-II EF50L TS-E17/4 TS-E24L-II TS-E45 TS-E90 MP-E65 EF70-200-II EF24-70/2.8-II EF16-35/4 EF8-15/4 EF11-24/4 Zeiss 15/2.8 21/2.8 25/2 28/2 35/1.4 35/2 50/2 85/1.4 100/2 135/2 T/C's L-SC & a WIFE!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 23, 2009 13:44 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban

macroimage wrote in post #7578837 (external link)
A diopter is the reciprocal of the focal length in meters so a 200mm lens is 5 diopters etc. It's just a calculation convenience to avoid all of the 1/f terms.

The close focus limit and magnification won't calculate accurately with the formulae above if you are assuming that the main lens's focal length remains at 200mm as you focus closer. Being an internal focus lens, it loses some focal length toward the close focus limit. 200mm FL is specified at infinity and focal length tolerances of 5% aren't uncommon so it is probably between 190 and 210mm at infinity. Canon's documentation says that you can get 0.57x (not a typo) at the close focus limit. It is less than you calculate because at the close focus limit, the focal length is not 200mm anymore but somewhat less. Your formula isn't considering pupular magnification either which is on telephoto lenses is usually less than 1 and affects the outcome a little.

The classic simple formalae are for single element symmetric thin lenses and this approximation gets stretched a bit too far for complex lenses, especially for telephoto designs where the nodal point is probably in front of the front element.

The fastest way to check is to just photograph a ruler.

Thanks for all the info! I need more education, apparently. One thing at a time, though -- I now know what "diopter" means!


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

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

2,465 views & 0 likes for this thread
500D + 200 / 2.8L
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ibflyin
883 guests, 163 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.