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 17 Jul 2011 (Sunday) 13:04
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why no Zoom Macro

 
Andrew_WOT
Goldmember
1,420 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Location: CA
     
Jul 17, 2011 13:04 |  #1

Why there are no real 1:1 Zoom Macro lenses, only primes?
Nikon 70-180mm Micro (external link)came closest with 1:1.32 (0.75) magnification but was discontinued. Foot zooming gets really old and sometimes plain impossible.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
macroimage
Goldmember
2,169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2007
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:02 |  #2

Andrew_WOT wrote in post #12773580 (external link)
Why there are no real 1:1 Zoom Macro lenses, only primes?
Foot zooming gets really old and sometimes plain impossible.

At 1:1 is it really such a long walk?


Photo Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:08 |  #3

Andrew_WOT wrote in post #12773580 (external link)
Why there are no real 1:1 Zoom Macro lenses, only primes?
Nikon 70-180mm Micro (external link)came closest with 1:1.32 (0.75) magnification but was discontinued. Foot zooming gets really old and sometimes plain impossible.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …o_Extension_Tub​e_Set.html (external link)


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thestone11
Goldmember
Avatar
1,203 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:10 |  #4

I wouldn't spend money on auto macro tubes.....go for the cheap $10 eBay ones, manual focus isn't that hard anyways, especially shooting macro on still objects.


Canon 5D MK II | Fuji X100 | Canon T2i | Canon 100mm macro f/2.8 | Canon 135L f/2 | Canon 50mm f/1.2 L | 17-40mm f/4 L | 24-70mm f/2.8 L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM |Canon 430EX II Flash X2 | Pocketwizard TT5 & TT1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:13 |  #5

thestone11 wrote in post #12774089 (external link)
I wouldn't spend money on auto macro tubes.....go for the cheap $10 eBay ones, manual focus isn't that hard anyways, especially shooting macro on still objects.

The auto tubes are 10% focus and 90% easily changing the aperture, IMO.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,475 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 750
Joined Aug 2006
Location: West Tennessee, USA
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:22 |  #6

macroimage wrote in post #12774056 (external link)
At 1:1 is it really such a long walk?

^^^+1 - it's more swaying than walking/foot zooming.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Overread
Goldmember
Avatar
2,226 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 72
Joined Mar 2010
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:28 |  #7

Surely the MPE 65mm macro counts as a zoom - it zooms from 1:1 to 5:1 ;)


Tools of the trade: Canon 400D, Canon 7D, Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS L M2, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS, Canon MPE 65mm f2.8 macro, Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro, Tamron 24-70mm f2.4, Sigma 70mm f2.8 macro, Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6, Raynox DCR 250, loads of teleconverters and a flashy thingy too
My flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:36 |  #8

macroimage wrote in post #12774056 (external link)
At 1:1 is it really such a long walk?

bw! I think it's the first time I've used this


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Madweasel
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,224 posts
Likes: 61
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Fareham, UK
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:48 |  #9

krb wrote in post #12774104 (external link)
The auto tubes are 10% focus and 90% easily changing the aperture, IMO.

That was my response too, maybe even more strongly in favour of auto aperture. AF isn't even reliable with tubes because you can soon go beyond an effective f/5.6 (effective aperture narrows with increasing lens extension). Most macro is done focusing manually, but not shooting at maximum aperture.


Mark.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AbPho
Goldmember
Avatar
3,165 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Planet Earth
     
Jul 17, 2011 15:50 |  #10

krb wrote in post #12774104 (external link)
The auto tubes are 10% focus and 90% easily changing the aperture, IMO.

Exactly.


I'm in Canada. Isn't that weird!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,435 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Aotearoa/New Zealand
     
Jul 17, 2011 18:17 |  #11

I think that it is a valid question, and that there are definite uses for a macro lens with variable focal length.

I believe that the same basic rules of composition apply with macro work as with any other: choose where you want to shoot from to get the perspective you want, and choose the focal length you want to get the framing you want. Magnification is essentially a by-product of these decisions.

In the macro realm, trying to do this with a prime can limit in our options. Once we determine any of these factors: distance, magnification, or framing, we lose control of the other two. With a macro zoom the interplay of perspective, framing, and magnification could be more fully explored and utilised.

On the down side, maintaining the level of flat field performance expected in macro lenses would be harder to achieve with a zoom.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Jul 17, 2011 19:49 |  #12

The truth is that nobody would want a zoom lens that offered 1:1 magnification because the lens would be at least as big as a non-macro version with a set of extension tubes attached. Just compare the size of any of Canon's macro primes to one of their non-macro primes of the same focal length. The 100/2.8 macro to the 100/2 non-macro for example.

At least with the extension tubes you can remove the tubes and have a more compact lens when storing it in the bag.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,435 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Aotearoa/New Zealand
     
Jul 17, 2011 23:20 |  #13

How about a 50-150 f/5.6 that only goes to 1:2? That'd work for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nich0145
Member
90 posts
Joined Jun 2011
Location: Malaysia
     
Jul 17, 2011 23:28 |  #14

xarqi wrote in post #12774939 (external link)
I think that it is a valid question, and that there are definite uses for a macro lens with variable focal length.

I believe that the same basic rules of composition apply with macro work as with any other: choose where you want to shoot from to get the perspective you want, and choose the focal length you want to get the framing you want. Magnification is essentially a by-product of these decisions.

In the macro realm, trying to do this with a prime can limit in our options. Once we determine any of these factors: distance, magnification, or framing, we lose control of the other two. With a macro zoom the interplay of perspective, framing, and magnification could be more fully explored and utilised.

On the down side, maintaining the level of flat field performance expected in macro lenses would be harder to achieve with a zoom.

Absolutely, a macro zoom is definitely possible albeit going to cost a lot. However at the end of the day the existence of such lens is really down to the demand, one example is the fisheye zoom (Although the "zoom" here work a bit differently from the normal zoom lens)


Nicholas

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Andrew_WOT
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,420 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Location: CA
     
Jul 18, 2011 01:57 |  #15

macroimage wrote in post #12774056 (external link)
At 1:1 is it really such a long walk?

No, at 1:1 it is obviously not :), but for close up work at lower magnifications it blows. I can't take picture of the whole flower w/o back pedaling significantly and sometimes there is just no room to go or you can't frame the subject the same as when being closer.

Close up lenses and extension tubes can be used with zooms but they are quite limiting (short working range, no infinity focusing, with tubes it's also loss of light, focus change when zooming, and quite poor AF ...)




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

2,847 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why no Zoom Macro
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 bluredsky
735 guests, 221 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.