How bad is 500D ?

I would like to make my 70-200 2.8L IS as macro lens rather than a dedicated macro lens, if i buy this filter lens 500D 77mm i do not know how is the quality. Some say the quality will not degrade.
Ofcourse dedicated 180macro lens will best choice, but i do not have budget a this moment so, i was thinking to get this to start taking macro.

Anyone ever use this as macro shoots?

The quality is very good really. Especially on a 10D where you won't be using the edges of the 500D.

However, I find the 500D a bit tough to use because you are locked into a tight range. I don't know what he numbers are, but I think you have something like a 2" range - that is, you will only get focus from 16" to 18" away from the subject.

Let me take a couple pictures and they'll give you an idea. Back in a bit.

Well at 200mm you're limited to being about 13-15" from the subject to the front of the lens. At 70mm the range is about 1" larger. At 200mm you'll be photographing an area just about 1x1.5". So you're extremely close to 1:1 but with a very limited range to subject.

You might want to look at a set of extension tubes - a Kenko set of 12mm, 20mm and 36mm costs about the same as the 500D. Your range is expanded quite a bit - from about 1/2" with all tubes to about 20' or 30' with just the 12mm. You won't get 1:1 unless you're using the larger tubes and are very close. And tubes can be a pain in the neck to change in and out.

So it depends on what you want to shoot for macro subjects. Nothing's ever easy.


Alas, it's pouring right now and the tripod is in the trunk, so the handheld/flash 500D images don't show the quality.

The 500D works very well with the 70-200.

I've got some more info and example images here.

The max magnification without extensions tubes is 0.57x and the max working distance at infinity focus is 500 mm (hence the name), just under 20 inches.

Regards,

I use the 500D with an EF 100-300 f/4.5-5.6.. (It's my "poor man's" macro lens I rarely shoot macro, but I'm pretty pleased with what I've obtained so far.

I'm considering getting one for my 100-400..

As Scottes says, the main complaint is distortion around the edges.. The crop factor you get with most EOS cameras means you don't see the edges..

Has anyone done any direct comparisons between the 500D, and the cheaper 500?

sismic,
Wrong question.
You imply that the 500D is 'bad' to start with.
Better to have asked how 'good' is the 500D on the 70-200/2.8L. then no-one gets the wrong idea!

Last night I got home from work and found a UPS package waiting for me. My 500D had arrived . I've been playing with it this morning for about an hour.

I have to agree that it is hard to work with. You have just a few inches where your subject will be in focus. This can make setting up your tripod a challenge. First you have to hand hold the camera to get an estimate of where the tripod needs to be placed. Then, you have to set up the tripod and make about 100 little adjustments to get everthing just right. I have a heavy duty tripod and ballhead and I still am having trouble making everything stand still. You will want to have a remote shutter release to make things work without a bunch of camera shake. I think I am going to cut a dowel at the average focus length of the 500D and use it to help estimate where I want the camera and tripod.

Handholding, using a flash, and a fast shutter speed seems to work ok. I set the focus to infinite and move the camera to focus the subject. This of course won't give the same results as using a tripod, but it is real easy and not even 1/4 as much trouble as using the 500D with a tripod.

Here are my first photos using the 500D and my Sigma 70-200 f2.8.

This one would have been better if the flower was parallel to the camera. You can see that the frame is in best focus in the lower right of the yellow flower center. Moving away from that point, the picture gets more blurred.
Maybe this isn't the best example.
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/29148722

Here's another. The center of the flower on the right is where I focused.
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/29148757

Here's one with a 2x teleconverter addded.
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/29149347

This one is handheld.
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/29149803

Remember, I only have been using the 500D for a couple hours so my examples may not be the best. It is cloudy here today and all these photos were taken in a shady area. Not the best macro conditions.

Dave

I have to update my opinion of the 500D already.

It is not that hard to work with! After playing around with it some more this afternoon, I have to say I really like the 500D. I think my earlier comments were based more on bad weather than equipment. It was rainy, damp, and cold this morning when I first went out to play. This afternoon the sun came out and I tryed the 500D again. I had more patience the 2nd time around abd found I really like this lens/filter whatever you call it.

Here are two new shots taken this aftyernoon:
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/29158625
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/29159923

i hope I get some more tyoes of flowers to bloom in my backyard.

Dave

Currently, Canon only sells a 500D

I've never heard of a 500 (Without the D). If there is one, it will probably be a discontinued item or a non Canon product. If you've got a link to some information on the non-D closeup lens, I'd be interested in seeing it..

Jim,

Canon are still listing the 500 in the latest PDF that you can get here:

http://canon.brochurel​ibrary.com/

Choose the full range file. I bought my 500D a couple of years ago; when I researched the info I found was that the optics on the 500D are much better than the 500.

Regards,

They sell both the 500D (double element) and 500 (single element).
http://www.usa.canon.c​om …sories/index.ht​ml#closeup

BH Photo has both, the 500 is only $39.
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …tails&Q=&sku=87​496&is=REG

That is why I was wondering how bad the 500 would be. For someone like me who doesnt use macro alot, I wonder if it would be really bad.