Tell me about the Canon 500D closeup lens

This series of lenses screws onto existing EF telephotos, converting them to closeup ("macro" lenses).

They appeal to me because I like to travel light, compared to lugging a 100mm macro with me. I seldom shoot macro, but when I do, I REALLY appreciate my existing EF-S 60 macro's performance. That lens is awesome, but does not fit full frame.

What would be the advantages of buying the 500D vs the 100 macro? And vice versa, why would one recommend the 100 macro over the 500D? Why not get a 85/1.8, that way you have a great lowlight lens and screw a $90 closeup lens on the front?

Do you lose infinity focus with the 500D?

This is taken on a 85mm and x3 closeup filter 1/350 f6.7 iso 100 a true macro lens would be sharper and you get closer but this is croped ,and you do lose infinity focus with a closeup filter .
pros there a lot cheaper
cons not as good as a true macro lens
Rob.

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

I think the 500D is a good alternative for travel but not a real substitute for a macro lens. On the plus side the 500d is a two optic closeup lens so you will get good quality and you will have no light loss with it. However you lose infinity focus and focusing becomes tricky. The longer the lens you put it on the harder it is to find focus. Also you cannot get one to one with a 500D. A macro lens on the other hand focuses quickly like any other lens and can also double as a short to medium telephoto or portrait lens.

Lightstream wrote in post #2402966
This series of lenses screws onto existing EF telephotos, converting them to closeup ("macro" lenses).

They appeal to me because I like to travel light, compared to lugging a 100mm macro with me. I seldom shoot macro, but when I do, I REALLY appreciate my existing EF-S 60 macro's performance. That lens is awesome, but does not fit full frame.

What would be the advantages of buying the 500D vs the 100 macro? And vice versa, why would one recommend the 100 macro over the 500D? Why not get a 85/1.8, that way you have a great lowlight lens and screw a $90 closeup lens on the front?

Do you lose infinity focus with the 500D?

i had the 250d or was that the 300d? anyhow i had the other canon diopter. i don't do much macro but i prefer tubes which fit any lens. there are advantages and disadvantages of course to whatever you choose.

ed rader

The 100mm macro is an all around better lens. It's fast and sharp. The 500D is a great add on, but it isn't optically perfect. I consider the 500D a 'poor man's' macro lens.

I have one myself, but I rarely shoot macro so I couldn't justify the 100mm Macro lens. I have the 58mm version that screws on my EF 100-300 lens.

You definitely lose infinity focus with the 500D in place

Here's a backyard monster I shot last summer with the combo

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

Jim-T,
I love that shot, 'monster' is right. As that is exactly felt like when I was camping (years ago) and one of these crawled on my face...scared the @#$% out of me. It felt like it was on my whole face at once. Thankfully it was a friendly spider…
I’m planning on picking up the 100 2.8 macro soon as like the possibilities macro photography presents.
Mike

I strongly considered the 500D when I had my Pro1 but bought a set of cheap Hoya closeup filters (+1, +2, +4) for about $15 off eBay, instead. While the Sigma 150 macro is on my short list of lenses to buy, I have fooled around with the Hoyas stacked on the 50 f/1.4

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

Excellent shots, thanks all

I am leaning more towards the 100 macro, it just has to justify its existence. I've been spoiled by things like the 60 macro so I guess the only way to go is... up (60 macro is 96 on crop)

Losing infinity focus is an issue since while doing product photography I often transition between macro WD (not true 1:1 but sometimes we need to get very close for detail shots) and full 100mm working range.

I have used dedicated macros, tubes, close ups in their FD forms and frankly one would be hard put to differentiate between the three at normal viewing size. (I'm talking T90 and Velvia.) I can post pics with a 100mm macro and a 70-200/4L + 12mm extn tube, most will find it very difficult to figure out differences at same magnification. What the eye does not see, the heart does not grieve about.
That said, the bokeh of a 3x close up is - to my mind - better than the bokeh of a 70-200 with tube.
Lastly, losing infinity is not an issue; just screw off the filter to regain infinity, takes maybe 5 secs. One can even modify a good quality snap on cap to hold the close up for immediate placement and removal. Besides, when one is concentrating on a macro/close up shot one does not just suddenly shift focus - and attention - to infinity!