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 Photography Talk by Genre Macro Talk 
Thread started 11 Apr 2017 (Tuesday) 15:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which Canon body for Macro?

 
racketman
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
21,129 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 989
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Richmond Surrey
     
Apr 28, 2017 16:12 |  #31

for me the one with the least noise at high ISO unless you are just going to do tripod work and stacking or just shooting flash.


Toby
Canon 5D MKIV & 90D
Olympus EM-1 MKII
Flickr collections (external link)
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,436 posts
Gallery: 429 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 21131
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Apr 28, 2017 16:23 |  #32

racketman wrote in post #18341233 (external link)
for me the one with the least noise at high ISO unless you are just going to do tripod work and stacking or just shooting flash.

That is pretty well all I do, tripod work and stacking, and 'just' shooting flash. :-)


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DarrinMB
Member
Avatar
123 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Encino, CA
     
May 19, 2017 19:19 |  #33

I have had great results from both a crop camera (old Rebel 400d xti) and full frame (5dm3). A lot of it will depend on your lenses, skill, and if you'll be printing your images or just keeping them digital/online.

I say go for the best body you can afford.

Like others have said also, search out some of Lord Vs post and comments on this.


Canon EOS 5D Mark iii
Canon EF 180mm F3.5L Macro
Canon 24-105 1.4
Canon MP-E 65
Canon EF 50 1.8
Canon Macro Twin MT-24EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
racketman
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
21,129 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 989
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Richmond Surrey
     
May 20, 2017 12:07 as a reply to  @ Archibald's post |  #34

You'll be using low ISO so any body with a vari-angle lcd should do the trick this being very useful for low level tripod work.


Toby
Canon 5D MKIV & 90D
Olympus EM-1 MKII
Flickr collections (external link)
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chris.R
Goldmember
2,670 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Jul 2016
     
May 25, 2017 10:56 |  #35

For me it was a toss up between the 7D2 and 80D.
80D is a shade better at lowest Iso which you will probably be using, and the tilting screen is useful.

I was annoyed to find though that the first shutter curtain is not as vibration-free on the 80D as it was with the 7D2 (or 70D)though. So for highest macro, natural light, the 7D2 wins, especially in the critical shutter speed zone, around say 1/10th of a second. At 2 seconds you don't see it. I have a 700d (t5i?) which I use instead, on a stand.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ECC233
Goldmember
Avatar
4,290 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Likes: 785
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Switzerland
     
Jun 04, 2017 21:25 as a reply to  @ Chris.R's post |  #36

I'm surprised nobody has suggested the 5dsr. This is my work horse for all macro work. I always have heavily diffused lighting, so never need to go above ISO 400. Th e extra MPs give you amazing freedom in cropping. As a result i hardly use the mpe-65 anymore, preferring the 100mm with extention tubes.


Ed
Galleries at https://bugsrus.smugmu​g.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,424 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6099
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 2 years ago by TeamSpeed.
     
Jun 04, 2017 21:35 as a reply to  @ ECC233's post |  #37

Probably because the 7D2 has the same basic pixel pitch as the 5DS, so there is virtually no gain one compared to the other in this regard.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chris.R
Goldmember
2,670 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Jul 2016
     
Jun 05, 2017 03:56 |  #38

ECC233 wrote in post #18371129 (external link)
I'm surprised nobody has suggested the 5dsr. This is my work horse for all macro work. I always have heavily diffused lighting, so never need to go above ISO 400. Th e extra MPs give you amazing freedom in cropping. As a result i hardly use the mpe-65 anymore, preferring the 100mm with extention tubes.

Sure, for me it's it's "just" the cost - the 5DSR has more going for it. The London Natural History Museum uses them for their bugs.
Pixel pitch matters mostly if you can't spread your image over a larger sensor, which is the case with many microscope objectives used on camera. Otherwise, more pixels just means more (cheap) memory, so bring it on.
I think the first shutter curtain in the 5DSR is pretty "silent", though I don't remember seeing a test.

[A bit of theory: If you enlarge a subject more to fill a larger sensor, then the Effective Aperture gets smaller. If diffraction is your limit to resolution, then it's a wash, there's theoretically little/no benefit to having the larger pixel count + the larger sensor. In practice, more does seem to work out somewhat better. The theoretical limit for the pixel pitches we're on about is around Effective Aperture f/10-12.
EA = marked aperture x (M+1), so with an MP-E at middling magnification, you're hitting it even wide open.
At lower magnifications, say 1:1 (M=1), you still need to be pretty wide. (5.6 x (1 + 1 ) ) = Eff/11
M needs to be higher for a FF sensor for the same field of view, (which can be a more useful number than Repro Ratio. )

DOF, strictly speaking, also turns out to be a wash ( (it took me ages with spreadsheets to accept that), but with a bigger sensor, "out of focus" stuff appears more OOF than it would have been with the smaller sensor. That matters in the field, but not for stacking.]

If you aren't caring about the last possible bit of resolution, then with a 5DSR you get the option - you can always crop if you want, or get more in the picture if you want :) - and there's no AA filter!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davholla
Goldmember
1,294 posts
Gallery: 199 photos
Likes: 1099
Joined Nov 2014
     
Jun 05, 2017 04:23 |  #39

ECC233 wrote in post #18371129 (external link)
I'm surprised nobody has suggested the 5dsr. This is my work horse for all macro work. I always have heavily diffused lighting, so never need to go above ISO 400. Th e extra MPs give you amazing freedom in cropping. As a result i hardly use the mpe-65 anymore, preferring the 100mm with extention tubes.

Is the cropping really that good?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,951 posts
Likes: 626
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jun 05, 2017 09:00 |  #40

ECC233 wrote in post #18371129 (external link)
I'm surprised nobody has suggested the 5dsr.

Well , for one, the original OP of this thread was looking for something at a lower price point! But the OP is probably gone by now...


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
Senior Member
437 posts
Gallery: 55 photos
Likes: 213
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Derbyshire
     
Jun 05, 2017 09:19 |  #41

I use a Canon 80D and I am more than happy with it. I first started macro (and other photography) on a 750D, then a 70D which were great but then I upgraded to the 80D which was a big improvement in terms of ISO and dynamic range, it also has much better focusing which helped me a lot with the motorsport photography I do.

I chose the 80D because it is a great versatile camera and the articulated screen helps a lot when doing macro, among other things like landscapes.

I'm more than happy with the images I get from it but the lenses also help with this. I haven't seen any images from higher end cameras that are much better than what I have produced so, I can't see the point in buying one personally, unless you need it for other more professional purposes like weddings.

It's not just the camera that gives you good images, there's a lot more to it than that such as good settings, lighting and post processing.


Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ECC233
Goldmember
Avatar
4,290 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Likes: 785
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Switzerland
Post edited over 2 years ago by ECC233. (2 edits in all)
     
Jun 05, 2017 10:05 |  #42

davholla wrote in post #18371285 (external link)
Is the cropping really that good?

What do you think? Significantly down-rezzed. And not a particularly good shot, just one from yesterday.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Ed
Galleries at https://bugsrus.smugmu​g.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davholla
Goldmember
1,294 posts
Gallery: 199 photos
Likes: 1099
Joined Nov 2014
     
Jun 05, 2017 10:15 |  #43

ECC233 wrote in post #18371427 (external link)
What do you think? Significantly down-rezzed. And not a particularly good shot, just one from yesterday.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by ECC233 in
./showthread.php?p=183​71427&i=i188804946
forum: Macro Talk

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by ECC233 in
./showthread.php?p=183​71427&i=i108451875
forum: Macro Talk

It is good but I think the MPE65 mm would be better.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
9,436 posts
Gallery: 429 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 21131
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
Post edited over 2 years ago by Archibald.
     
Jun 05, 2017 10:27 |  #44

Chris.R wrote in post #18371269 (external link)
Sure, for me it's it's "just" the cost - the 5DSR has more going for it. The London Natural History Museum uses them for their bugs.
Pixel pitch matters mostly if you can't spread your image over a larger sensor, which is the case with many microscope objectives used on camera. Otherwise, more pixels just means more (cheap) memory, so bring it on.
I think the first shutter curtain in the 5DSR is pretty "silent", though I don't remember seeing a test.

[A bit of theory: If you enlarge a subject more to fill a larger sensor, then the Effective Aperture gets smaller. If diffraction is your limit to resolution, then it's a wash, there's theoretically little/no benefit to having the larger pixel count + the larger sensor. In practice, more does seem to work out somewhat better. The theoretical limit for the pixel pitches we're on about is around Effective Aperture f/10-12.
EA = marked aperture x (M+1), so with an MP-E at middling magnification, you're hitting it even wide open.
At lower magnifications, say 1:1 (M=1), you still need to be pretty wide. (5.6 x (1 + 1 ) ) = Eff/11
M needs to be higher for a FF sensor for the same field of view, (which can be a more useful number than Repro Ratio. )

DOF, strictly speaking, also turns out to be a wash ( (it took me ages with spreadsheets to accept that), but with a bigger sensor, "out of focus" stuff appears more OOF than it would have been with the smaller sensor. That matters in the field, but not for stacking.]

If you aren't caring about the last possible bit of resolution, then with a 5DSR you get the option - you can always crop if you want, or get more in the picture if you want :) - and there's no AA filter!

FF or crop is an interesting question for macro, especially when considering the 5DS with its high megapixels. I decided to do a (theoretical) comparison. To compare these formats, one has to decide on some premises, or things get real confusing. Here are my premises for this exercise.

  • Crop vs FF
  • Equal pixel pitch
  • Same picture (equal framing, perspective, and DOF)
  • Base case focal length of 100mm and magnification of 1 for the crop sensor.

In this comparison, the FF would need a focal length of 124mm and a magnification of 1.6x to match the crop picture. To get equal DOF, the FF would need f/13.8 vs f/11 (marked) for the crop body. As you suggest, the effective aperture would be a lot smaller for FF.

The FF would end up with almost double the Airy diameter, meaning that diffraction is worse and its effective resolution would be significantly less than for the crop case. Conclusion: the crop format (for the stated premises) has a significant advantage.

Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 90D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ECC233
Goldmember
Avatar
4,290 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Likes: 785
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Switzerland
Post edited over 2 years ago by ECC233.
     
Jun 05, 2017 10:39 |  #45

davholla wrote in post #18371435 (external link)
It is good but I think the MPE65 mm would be better.


I'm not sure about getting into the ant nest with the mpe-65 ... I am a coward at heart


Ed
Galleries at https://bugsrus.smugmu​g.com

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

18,117 views & 12 likes for this thread
Which Canon body for Macro?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Macro Talk 
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 mark_watson
1002 guests, 361 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.