Macro (Canon 100mm)

I am looking at getting a Macro lens for the 300d. I have looked around and found the 100mm a good choice. It is a bit expensive (around 400) but I can save up. I will mostly be using it for lots of bug photos. I want to be able to get right down in there and get some high quality shots with close focus. I want to be able to get the honeycombs of a wasp's eye in plain focus and have it take up most of the image. Would the 100mm be able to do this?

[Original]

I just tried a 105 macro and 68mm worth of tube. If the wasp was 1/2 inch wide it would have filled the frame. So I think you could fill the frame with a 100 macro and more tube.

You would more than likely need a macro ring flash also, because you would have light loss from a lot of tube plus you would need a very small aperture to get some depth of field.

Sounds like you might want to look at the Canon MPE-65 f2.8 Macro Lens. It is considerably more expensive but has magnification from 1-5x. I saw some bug shots taken with it some time ago (I don't recall the site off the top of my head). But they literally looked out of this world. http://consumer.usa.ca​non.com …tegoryid=155&mo​delid=7325

I was going to say the same.. those look like MPE 65 shots to me..

The MPE 65 can get you FIVE times closer than the 100mm on it's own.

But it's a completley diferent kind of lens.... the 100mm is a much easier lens to use.

Here is an article on insect photography.

http://www.richard-seaman.com …graphy/Insects/​index.html

Also you might look into the Canon 500D macro adapter. Inexpensive and works very well. I prefer it to tubes.

And another set of discussions.

http://www.robgalbrait​h.com …ype=&bodyprev=#​Post162910

I recently just purchased a Sigma 105mm 2.8......all I can say is I have a new-found respect for all you macro shooters. No, you will not get anywhere NEAR those types of photos with just a 100mm. Get ready for alot of frustration/experiment​ation (its all worth it when you get a good pic of course).
That kind of detail or close up is not achievable with the 100mm alone. Im in the process of buying a Kenko extension tube set ($129 B+H) and I sincerely hope Im able to get the kind of shots you have there. Something tells me its not. Ive even tried reverse-ring photos.....ie putting a 50mm reversed with a coupler to my 105mm. Instead of 1:1, its more like 1:25.
Does anyone know if the Kenko tubes will make a big difference with my 105? Am I going to have to be right on top of the subject Im photographing like I am now (like, 1 inch from the lens ) or will the extension tubes allow me to back off slightly and still fill the frame? Its a little hard taking pics of these tiny guys 1 inch off the lens (living OR dead).
Also.....Im getting the 500 DG Super flash with the Bogen Flash mount (you can position your flash at an angle from the side of the lens). Anyone have any thoughts on these? I cant afford any flash rings at this time (unless of course I get a cheap Vivitar).

Thoughts?

Thanks

The extension tubes won't let you back off from the subject. Only a longer lens will do that. What extension tubes do is let you focus closer by effectively extending the focussing helical by 12, 26, or whatever mm. that's the tube length. Quick formula is 1/fl = 1/d1 + 1/d2 where fl is focal length, d1 is subject distance (to lens nodal point) and d2 is sensor distance (to nodal point), and magnification m=d2/d1

Ok....so if Im already 1 inch away from the subject at 1:1 with the 105mm, the extension tubes would only allow me to move CLOSER (less than an inch) from the subject? Would it benefit me if I backed the stops down, and brought the lens to say 1:2 (move farther away) add extension tubes to fill the frame?
Or should I try a different approach all together........1.4TC on the 105 with possibly a 500D filter-lens?
Suggestions?

Bottom line is Im not happy with the magnification of the 105 by itself......want a little more pop.

thanks in advance.

No, filling the frame at 1:1, moving back and re-focussing the lens to 1:2 and adding extension tubes is just like dialing the focus back out to 1:1. You'll still have to adjust the camera's position to get in focus, and you'll change the working distance exactly as much by adding extension tubes as by focussing to 1:1 and moving the camera.

Look at it this way: to get a 1:1 image on the sensor with your 105 mm macro, you need to move the lens out 105 mm from infinity. That will give you a specific magnification (1:1) and a specific plane at which there is focus (210 mm in front of the nodal point). Now it makes absolutely no difference whether you get that 105 mm of extension by using the focussing helical or by putting extension tubes totalling 105 mm or some combination of the two. You're still going to have the same working distance for the same magnification. The only way you're going to get a longer working distance is with a longer lens focal length.

Close-up lenses work by shortening the focal length of the lens combination, and generally focus at only a very limited distance range. A 500D close-up lens will focus your (normal) lens at 500 mm. But that won't get you very close to life size. A teleconverter (between the extension tubes and the body) will give you the maximum working distance. So, go the teleconverter route. You'll get 1:1 with about 280-300 mm working distance.

Jon......

A TC wont work with the 105mm.....just looked it up..... . Think the 500D on the 105mm will give me greater magnification?

Thanks

OK - Canon's won't, and Sigma's won't (I think), but Tamron's should. The Canon has a protruding front element that runs into the back of non-compatible lenses and, IIRC, the Sigma does too. I don't believe the Tamron 1.4 does (my Tamron 2X doesn't).

No, I don't think the 500D will give you a better working distance. It'll convert your lens into a shorter effective focal length, so the working distance for a given magnification will be smaller. If I remember the formula correctly, it'll give you effectively an 85 mm lens, so working distance for life-size will be about 170 mm. Remember, at life-size, the working distance from the nodal point of the lens is about 2x the focal length.

Correct me if i'm wrong but the 100mm has a minimum focusing distance of 4". Now if i put in some extension tubes i can get closer to the subject and inturn increase the magnification but it will drastically reduce the light falling on the subject. So does it mean that using extension tubes on a 100mm macro is useless to get higher magnification than 1:1.

Ok.......Please bear with me.......the 500D wont give me better WORKING distance......but will it give me better magnification with the 105mm macro?


Thanks again

Well, no . . . You're losing on the order of two full stops already by being at 1:1; you'll just lose more as you extend it further, but it's not "useless".

Yes. Running the formula (which I've just been able to look up), and neglecting the separation between the two lenses, you'll effectively be using about a 75 mm lens, so with the lens at maximum extension ("1:1"), you'll be at about 1.8:1. Working distance will be around 110-115 mm.

(Thanks, Wall & Jordan, 1976 ed.)