macro 1:2 vs 1:1

PacAce wrote in post #6826310
Why would you need to see a side-by-side image comparison to make up your mind. If you have a 1:1 macro lens, the size of the image projected on to the image sensor would be the same size as the subject. With a 1:2 macro lens, the image would be half of real life size. So, if you had the two pictures side by side, the 1:2 picture would show the subject half the size (linear measurement) of that in the 1:1 picture.

Well, I don't have a macro lens, so I cannot do such a test. Furthermore I'm interested to know how much details the 1:1 macro lens can yield over a 1:2 macro. That's not something a math formula will show. Am I interested to see the sh!t stuck up a fly's butt? No, But I want to be able to appreciate the texture of a leave or a flower petal. I can't estimate that with my current set up, nor the math formula can.

PacAce wrote in post #6826310
You can simulate this by using a zoom lens and taking a picture at, say, 24mm and another at 50mm.

The perspective at 24mm would be different than at 50mm, so no, it wouldn't be the same at all.

cedm wrote in post #6824002
Thanks John!

The difference between 1:1 & 1:2 is actually bigger than I thought. That's interesting. I'm leaning towards 1:1 now

The sample photos were taken with a 5D, and you are using a 1.6x format camera. You should understand that the 1:2 shot with your camera will show the blossom as much bigger than the 1:2 shot on the 5D. That said, I agree with the rest that you really need to buy a macro lens. The extension tubes and close up lenses are just not convenient, except for when you really need to travel light.

cedm wrote in post #6828311
Well, I don't have a macro lens, so I cannot do such a test. Furthermore I'm interested to know how much details the 1:1 macro lens can yield over a 1:2 macro. That's not something a math formula will show. Am I interested to see the sh!t stuck up a fly's butt? No, But I want to be able to appreciate the texture of a leave or a flower petal. I can't estimate that with my current set up, nor the math formula can.



The perspective at 24mm would be different than at 50mm, so no, it wouldn't be the same at all.

Sure it would be. Perspective isn't affected by the difference in focal length of two lenses assuming everything else remains constant. It's affected by the difference in distance. So, from the same distance, taking a picture with a 24mm lens and another with a 50mm lens, there will be no difference in the perspective of the two images; the difference will only be in the sizes of the subject in the images.

if it isnt 1:1 or lower it isnt macro