Macro for flowers?

Hi there,

I'm having Search function issues. Probably because I'm on my phone. Don't have access to the desktop.

I'm not into flower pics. My gal is. I know nothing about Macro lens. She would most likely use the 4Ti - but also wants to use the XT that hasn't seen much use since we got the 4Ti.

Is the 60Macro good for flowers or does she need the 100Macro?

Anyone with sample pics?

Thanks for any info & pics

You can use the ef-s 60mm f/2.8 Macro lens for flowers. It will work just fine. The only thing the 100mm will do for you is allow you to take the exact same photo from 3" further away. Be advised: macro can take some special lighting.

If you want to get off cheap to start with, just buy some extension tubes and use them with your 50mm f/1.8. You can get amazingly close without buying a macro lens.

You may NOT need 'macro' lens at all. 'Macro' technically refers to lenses which are designed specificially to do three things...

1. photograph an object on film/sensor at [<30% of real size] to [>500% of real size] (figures provided for conceptual understanding only; photographers will hotly debate the numbers!)
   
2. photograph a flat object (e.g. postage stamp) and have the entire flat object fall within a flat field of focus (not a curved field of focus)
   
3. photograph at very close distance with minimal color abberations (which are caused by the fact that red light focuses at a different place than blue light -- and most lenses do not correct for this at super close focus distance)
   

• at 1:1 (lifesize on sensor), a photographic area of 15mm x 22.5mm
  
• at 1:2 (50% of lifesize), a photographic area of of 30mm x 45mm
  
• at 1:3 (33% of lifesize), a photographic area of 45mm x 67.5mm
  
• at 1:5 (20% of lifesize), a photographic area of 75mm x 112.5mm
  

Shooting just the flowers tends to be boring Try including another object to add...........Try youtube for additional info...........

Thanks for the info.

I think I like this idea. I know the light has to be right. I tried to take pics of her flowers - I don't remember what she didn't like about it.

Wilt wrote in post #18277728
You may NOT need 'macro' lens at all.

I completely agree with the overall message of your post and think the OP should just go out and shoot flowers with the current lenses because I think they will be enough for the need.

Wilt wrote in post #18277728
IOW, unless the flower is smaller than 2" (about 51mm) across, a macro lens will not capture the entire flower in the frame of her camera...

However this statement would tend to make people think that you have to use a macro lens a 1:1 minimum focus distance. They can always just back up with a macro lens and get more in the frame.

Just use what you have for now. It will work fine for many if not most flowers. Concentrate on lighting and composition. Those are more important than the lens.

If you want to get in closer, then consider extension tubes or a close-up lens first. If things evolve and you can see how a dedicated macro lens will benefit you, then buy the macro lens.

FEChariot wrote in post #18278304
However this statement would tend to make people think that you have to use a macro lens a 1:1 minimum focus distance. They can always just back up with a macro lens and get more in the frame.

I should have phrased that a bit differently.
If you do not need 1:2 repro ratio -- which is what a macro is designed to achieve -- you do NOT need a macro lens at all! If your 50mm lens focuses to 14" and you simply want to capture an area smaller than 5x8", the simple addition of a short 12mm extension tube allows you to photograph about 2 x 3"

.
Macro Photography and Close-up Photography are two different things, as Wilt so well explained. I think that the type of flower photography that your gal would like to do will be well accomplished with Close-up Photography, and that Macro Photography is not at all necessary, or even preferable, for the flower photos that she wants to take.

The suggestion of using extension tubes on a 'normal' prime like the 50mm is a really good idea.

.

probably don't need a macro lens for most flowers...instead using lighting, for flowers i typically use a tripod...the DOF at short distances is so small, that stacking images sometimes is the only way to get most of the flower in focus

Came in to agree with everyone that you don't need a true macro lens. There are lots of great flower pics here with lenses like the 100-400ii and the 70-200s, probably also the 135L and 85/1.8 and all sorts of others.

Macro lenses are not required for close-ups, but I just can't do without macro lenses! Using a macro lens doesn't mean you will always be shooting 1:1 or 1:2, it just means that you can if the need arises. Macro is different mindset, at least for me. The nice thing is you can literally spend two hours in a small area where there might not be anything worth shooting otherwise. There are a couple of dead-end country roads near my house and I can park on the road without any issues and shoot macro for 3 hours. I don't use flash, which means I must use a tripod and it's not very often I can photograph moving things(leaves/flowers in a breeze or moving insects). The upside is that it makes me concentrate more on the subject since I move much slower. As to the length, personally, I wouldn't use anything less than a 90mm -- you are just too close to the subject. I just upgraded from a Tamron 90mm to a Tamron 180mm and love the extra reach --- this is for a full frame camera. You can get a 90mm Tamron for around $350 new, I bought my 180mm used from this site's used-gear forum for $375.

Just shot this series very quickly to illustrate:

DreDaze wrote in post #18278401
probably don't need a macro lens for most flowers...instead using lighting, for flowers i typically use a tripod...the DOF at short distances is so small, that stacking images sometimes is the only way to get most of the flower in focus

Agreed and I just want to add.......bring a diffuser for whatever reason there seems to be a tendency to capture flowers in full sun.

I also noted that the thread starter has a 50mm lens which an adapter may be used to reverse the lens. I'll leave it to others to explain the technical details. I use old film lens that I still own if for no other reason than to find a use for something old......