MP-E 65 Question

is this lens really THAT sharp? I keep seeing these amazing shots taken with it and I am really considering buying it to start myself off right in the macro world. another question about it is that I noticed the pics have little to no grain, are you guys just using PS filters such as noise ninja or once again is the lens just that nice? sorry for the rambling but I really want this lens and its alot of money for me, so I am just doing some research on it first...I like to hear from you guys instead of just reading reviews. Thanks

lbcyalater wrote in post #7240789
is this lens really THAT sharp? I keep seeing these amazing shots taken with it and I am really considering buying it to start myself off right in the macro world. another question about it is that I noticed the pics have little to no grain, are you guys just using PS filters such as noise ninja or once again is the lens just that nice? sorry for the rambling but I really want this lens and its alot of money for me, so I am just doing some research on it first...I like to hear from you guys instead of just reading reviews. Thanks

Noise is a function of your camera body, has nothing to do with the lenses

From what I understand, its an amazing but highly specialized optic, It has no use really beyond macrophotography, and you should probubly invest in a focus rail and a speedlight for it, because at the magnifications you deal with, the depth of field even at f/22 is razor thin.....

Its amazing, as are all macro lenses, especially in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing

lbcyalater wrote in post #7240789
... I am really considering buying it to start myself off right in the macro world...

In which case, the MP-E 65 isn't the lens you want. It is where you end up after learning the ropes at 1:1, and still wanting more, and having the budget and patience to achieve it.

I'd suggest that you consider the EF-S 60/2.8 macro instead.

lbcyalater wrote in post #7240789
is this lens really THAT sharp? I keep seeing these amazing shots taken with it and I am really considering buying it to start myself off right in the macro world. another question about it is that I noticed the pics have little to no grain, are you guys just using PS filters such as noise ninja or once again is the lens just that nice? sorry for the rambling but I really want this lens and its alot of money for me, so I am just doing some research on it first...I like to hear from you guys instead of just reading reviews. Thanks

Its a highly specialized lens. While the idea of "starting off right" applies to most photography, macro demands patience, precision, and accessories. The accessories include, sturdy tripod (Bogen Manfrotto, Gitzo), sturdy head (Manfrotto, Gitzo, RRS, Arcaswiss), focusing rails, macro speedlight(s), and lots of practice. This isn't a handholdable lens (weightwize it is, but resultswize its not), this is a production.

If you're just getting into macro, you don't need it, it will probably make you hate macro in fact because without proper equipment and planning and practice your results will be awful. It really is a demanding specialized tool.

If you're just getting started, and have decided to get a dedicated lens, get either the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM or the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM. Both of these lenses will be a little less demanding and don't have as steep a learning curve. Also, both of these lenses CAN be used for general photography and cost a ton less than the MP-E 65mm. The 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, which I recently picked up (at Circuit City for $318.00, my deal of the year so far), has a wickedly fast USM motor and beatiful bokeh at f/2.8 all the way up to f/4, and gives you 6-12" of working distance from your subject when you really want to get close and get a 1:1 reproduction. Scares away a few less bugs.

-Alan

nureality wrote in post #7240907
Its a highly specialized lens. While the idea of "starting off right" applies to most photography, macro demands patience, precision, and accessories. The accessories include, sturdy tripod (Bogen Manfrotto, Gitzo), sturdy head (Manfrotto, Gitzo, RRS, Arcaswiss), focusing rails, macro speedlight(s), and lots of practice. This isn't a handholdable lens (weightwize it is, but resultswize its not), this is a production.

If you're just getting into macro, you don't need it, it will probably make you hate macro in fact because without proper equipment and planning and practice your results will be awful. It really is a demanding specialized tool.

If you're just getting started, and have decided to get a dedicated lens, get either the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM or the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM. Both of these lenses will be a little less demanding and don't have as steep a learning curve. Also, both of these lenses CAN be used for general photography and cost a ton less than the MP-E 65mm. The 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, which I recently picked up (at Circuit City for $318.00, my deal of the year so far), has a wickedly fast USM motor and beatiful bokeh at f/2.8 all the way up to f/4, and gives you 6-12" of working distance from your subject when you really want to get close and get a 1:1 reproduction. Scares away a few less bugs.

-Alan

I missed the getting started part..yeh..the MPE is NOT the lens for that..AT ALL

Just to warn you, even at less than 1:1, at 1:3 or even 1:5 or so, every MINOR movement of your body or the subject will place the subject out of focus, I was rather frustrated yesterday because the wind kept moving the flowers too much for me to get them in focus with my 60mm macro

Once you decrease your subject to film plane distance, you're starting to get razor thin depth of field...Seriously thin depth of field...

id stick with a canon 100/2.8 macro, or equivalent, until you get the macro DoF and all of that worked out. Even at only 1:1 a tiny movement can make or break a picture. Now multiply that risk by 5x when you are shooting with the MPE-65.

Macro is a lot of fun but it really does take some work to get the hang of. Jumping into the MPE is no leap for someone just starting out!

the lack of grain you are seeing is due to the intensely thin sliver of DOF that you get from this lens, everything blurs to vapor quick.

yeah...you don't want an mp-e to start out...it doesn't even go below 1:1...here's something that you should really start trying to get good at though
http://www.wonderfulph​otos.com …les/macro/focus​_stacking/

it's a link to focus stacking, I think most of LordV's shots in the macro section involve some sort of stacking...to me that in itself is an art form...i'm still struggling with it, and stacking my 100mm w/tubes & TC shots

wow, im officially intimidated lol... I was thinking of the 100mm and since NO one recommended the 65 I might just have to go that route

If you get the MP-E 65 without any normal 1:1 experience you will become very frustrated very fast....

lbcyalater wrote in post #7242689
wow, im officially intimidated lol... I was thinking of the 100mm and since NO one recommended the 65 I might just have to go that route

did you know u focus the lense by moving the camera back and forth? this lens is hell.

I wouldn't say that one shouldn't start out taking macro pics with this lens! Depends if you're up for a challenge, and have patience.

You definately need lots of patience, and be the kind of person that likes nutting out how to use gear, rather than just expecting it to be easy, because this lens is not.
However, if your idea of macro is 1:1 and bigger, and you are comfortable with the idea of a manual focus lens where you have to move the object into the focus area of the lens, rather than focusing on an object....then go for it! You really will need a macro flash to use this lens at 1:2 and greater magnifications, I lasted a week without a flash. Everything is too dark - the lens eats up the light.

If you are very steady, it's possible to use this lens without a tripod, but for greater magnifications, you'll need one, because the DOF is so thin.

This lens cannot be used for anything other than macro - because the lens has fixed focus points (probably not correct terminology) depending on the magnification. ie, you won't be able to focus on that car driving by. You also won't be able to fit anything other than small objects into the frame, even at 1:1. No roses, big butterflies, whole lilies etc - all too big. But you can photograph their pollen grains....

If you want the other kind of macro lens, that is 1:1 or less, I'd recommend the Canon 100mm macro. This one gives you a bit of telephoto - distance between you and your subject such as butterflies, which would fly away if you try and use a shorter lens such as a 60mm. The 100mm has great IQ, sharpness, is easy to use, and can be used for non-macro stuff too - such as portraits, landscape etc.

I've got both, and plan to keep it that way, as what you can do with one, can't be done with the other. Try fitting a whole large butterfly into the MP-E field of view! But then you can create high magnification images with the MP-E.

get the 100mm/60mm which allow you have <1:1 up to 1:1 .. and after you get use to it .. then MPE is the len you want ....and only Canon have