Canon Macro Xmas Present for wife - need advice

I'm trying to figure out which things to get my wife for xmas to further her enjoyment of photography. I have noticed she likes to take close up pictures of leaves, plants, mushrooms etc. She also takes lots of candid people shots and "sports" shots (medieval combat...) http://darklingdesign.​com/~jedon/gallery/Cyn​aguan_Coronet_Oct_2005 She has a Canon 300D, a Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 70-300 f/5.6?, and the kit lens. My plan is to get her a variety of things to give her more flexibilty. 1. Bogen/Manfroto 682B monopod with legs and swivel head 2. Canon 50mm f/1.8 II 3. a set of extender tubes for macro work (brand?) 4. Tamron 1.4x TC Any opinions on this selection?
Thanx!
-Jedon

Have you considered a macro lens? The Canon 100mm F2.8 macro is designed for closeup photos, and does a great job for portraits too. A tripod will help a lot for macro, as will an external flash like the 420EX or 430EX.

Yes I have strongly considered the Canon 100mm macro, I just figured she could get close to that functionality with the various things I listed and it would be more flexible, am I way off base here?
50mm - portrait, general fast lens
50mm + tubes - macro
50mm + TC + tubes - close in macro
70-200 + TC - more zoom
Thank you very much for your replies
-Jedon

I don't know much about TCs and tubes, you could be right. Personally if I want to take macro photos, I use a macro lens, but i've seen some incredible photos taken with very basic equipment.

The thing about macro is the depth of field is very very small, so you need to use small apertures. For that having lots of light is great, which is why I recommended a flash.

No doubt someone who knows about macro and that type of equipment will come along soon and help you out

also, whether you use tubes or a designated macro lens, try to get a macro focusing rail to stick on the tripod. many do macro handheld, but a good rail has got to be a blessing when fighting with a shallow depth of field.

While versatility is nice, I'd still go for the 100mm f2.8 macro lens. It can also be used for other things than macro. If you were feeling really generous, you could pop for the Speedlight MR-14EX Macro Ringlight. I bet she'd love that combo.

Mark

Does a Canon 300D body take EF-S lenses?
Why? Because of few of these have come up used, in like new condition:
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/32007​9
saving $150 over mail order. Use the savings to get your wife an Adorama label "store brand" dual focusing rail for only $150, instead of the $350+ Novoflex or RRS solutions.

While I normally also recommend ANY good brand of DEDICATED 100mm macro lens [See my choosing macro sticky top of lens forum page] over the pseudo-dual use compromise choices you listed, there are like new bargain Canon EF-S 60mm macro f/2.8 available. Dual use macro options are frustrating most times, mostly good when shooting dragon or butterflies. Swiss army knife macro approaches are second rate choices.

Why 60mm EF-S? Because you say she takes pictures of "things that don't move:" leaves, plants, mushrooms. She does not need the working distance offered by a 100mm macro. Because it's a cracking good lens. Because it's portable a fits in a pocket. Lenses convenient to carry get used. Because it does nice portraits.

Another alternative is to buy her a Canon 77mm 500D diopter close-up filter attachment for her 70-200 f/4L for $140 plus a 67mm-77mm step up ring for $10.
With this she will have "dual use close-up" with the existing tele zoom, with out buying any new lens. No light loss. Convenient. good results. Not really macro, but not bad. Then buy her a good tripod to hold it and a 430 EX flash to put on it, if you don't have a hot shoe flash.

You are nice to your wife.
That's a good thing.
Jack
Typical boring Bleeding Heart 60mm EF-S macro shot:
http://postit.rutgers.​edu …dingHeart%5Ff8%​5F40%2Ejpg
It's all I got on home computer. Shows the lens capability

Yeah, I'd vote for the 100mm macro as well, if you don't have a macro already this lens is great. Super sharp even for regular distance photography. Tripod & a Focus rail good accessories for macro. And extension tubes. Flash is helpfull but you can also use reflectors to help out with lighting as a less expensive solution.

PS the 100mm will also be a reasonable lens to use for candid people photography. Gives a pretty good working distance.

J Rabin wrote:
Does a Canon 300D body take EF-S lenses?
Why? Because of few of these have come up used, in like new condition:
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/32007​9
saving $150 over mail order. Use the savings to get your wife an Adorama label "store brand" dual focusing rail for only $150, instead of the $350+ Novoflex or RRS solutions.

While I normally also recommend ANY good brand of DEDICATED 100mm macro lens [See my choosing macro sticky top of lens forum page] over the pseudo-dual use compromise choices you listed, there are like new bargain Canon EF-S 60mm macro f/2.8 available. Dual use macro options are frustrating most times, mostly good when shooting dragon or butterflies. Swiss army knife macro approaches are second rate choices.

Why 60mm EF-S? Because you say she takes pictures of "things that don't move:" leaves, plants, mushrooms. She does not need the working distance offered by a 100mm macro. Because it's a cracking good lens. Because it's portable a fits in a pocket. Lenses convenient to carry get used. Because it does nice portraits.

Ever stop to wonder why a recently-released lens is showing up in noticeable quantities in "like-new" condition? The 60 EF-S was an unnecessary compromise. Working distance isn't just about how close you have to get. It also impacts how precise you have to be in shifting camera position to get the right bit in focus. Longer lenses need to be moved a little bit more, so you've got somewhat more precise control.

If you can swing the Canon 100 Macro, here's another vote for it. We have one here at the office and it really does a nice job. Also another vote for the MR-14EX ring light.

That being said, I just (today) dropped $$ in the mail to another forum member to buy a set of Kenko extension tubes for my personal use. Members seem to rate them highly, for what they are. I'm hoping they will give me "just enough macro" to satisfy me. If not, I'll have them to stick on a shiny-new macro lens to shoot bug nosehair!

I might wait on the macro rails to see if she really needs them. In good light and a controlled environment, I've had no problem manually focusing our 100 macro at it's closest distance. In lower light, face-in-the-dirt strange angles, etc. I understand they can be a big help.

The 50 f1.8 is a really nice choice for the price. I love my 50 (different lens, but close enough).

Good luck, and let us know what you choose...

Thank you all for the advice.
So from a purely economic point of view:
Option 1. Canon 100mm Macro is $460 new and $380 used
Canon 50mm f/1.8 is $75
Tamron SP Autofocus 1.4x Pro Teleconverter is $180
Total: $635
Option 2. Canon 60mm EF-S Macro is $420 new and $350 used
Canon 50mm f/1.8 is $75
Tamron SP Autofocus 1.4x Pro Teleconverter is $180
Total: $605
Option 3. Canon 77mm 500D diopter close-up filter + step up ring is $150
Canon 50mm f/1.8 is $75
Tamron SP Autofocus 1.4x Pro Teleconverter is $180
Kenko DG Auto Extension Tube Set for the Canon EOS AF Mount $160
Total: $565
So, considering that she does a variety of shots including candid portraits, sports, scenic landscapes and macros of still life, which combo would give her the best all around setup to compliment her existing equipment?
Thank you! So many choices...

Oh and she does not have a flash and doesn't know how to use one.
Is there any way the Canon rebates would help much for all this?

The Canon 100 macro's down for a $20 rebate; the EF-S 60 for $15, so that moves those two closer together. I'd go with Option 1. There'll be a lot of fussing around with tubes or a close-up lens to get in close at the right size until she gets fully adjusted to them, whereas with a straight macro lens she can just focus on in.

Treat her,ef100 macro.