Curse you Nikon (for tempting me)
Ok,
I bet I have spent 50+ hours on the net researching my first dSLR/lens/flash combination purchase(95% of shots will be insect macros) . Initially, something convinced me to go Canon and that is where my research has been focused.
Thus, I had decided on:
20d
100mm Canon Macro lens (spent much research here...seemed a tie between the Canon/Tamron/Sigma, but decided on Canon for resale, future compatibility issues). Most shots will be handheld, so did not want extra weight of greater than 100mm.
Flash (still not sure...MT-24EX is to bulky to hike around with as are flash brackets....MR14 ringlight is good/bad depending on who you listen to...still contemplating) --anybody convince me/deter me from the MR-14 Ringlight?
ok, so far so good and am about ready to make a purchase.
...Then I see Nikon's announcement of their new 105mm macro lens with IR (or VR as Nikon calls it). Hmm, that could be nice, though I am not sure how well it would/could work (comments on this?). Then I see they have wireless flash as well to help take some weight/bulk off. These and the Nikon d200 with its weather sealing (going to Peru this summer) are tempting me (though a little bit more expensive)
Thus, now I am tempted by Nikon's offerings. I don't have any investment in any glass at the moment, so am undecided. What would you, the seasoned veterans purchase if you were starting from scratch as I am? My FZ-20 was kind to me last year, but am ready to upgrade just a little. Here is my gallery of FZ-20 macros from last year: http://www.perceptions.smugmug.com/gallery/717675
Ken
I bet I have spent 50+ hours on the net researching my first dSLR/lens/flash combination purchase(95% of shots will be insect macros) . Initially, something convinced me to go Canon and that is where my research has been focused.
Thus, I had decided on:
20d
100mm Canon Macro lens (spent much research here...seemed a tie between the Canon/Tamron/Sigma, but decided on Canon for resale, future compatibility issues). Most shots will be handheld, so did not want extra weight of greater than 100mm.
Flash (still not sure...MT-24EX is to bulky to hike around with as are flash brackets....MR14 ringlight is good/bad depending on who you listen to...still contemplating) --anybody convince me/deter me from the MR-14 Ringlight?
ok, so far so good and am about ready to make a purchase.
...Then I see Nikon's announcement of their new 105mm macro lens with IR (or VR as Nikon calls it). Hmm, that could be nice, though I am not sure how well it would/could work (comments on this?). Then I see they have wireless flash as well to help take some weight/bulk off. These and the Nikon d200 with its weather sealing (going to Peru this summer) are tempting me (though a little bit more expensive)
Thus, now I am tempted by Nikon's offerings. I don't have any investment in any glass at the moment, so am undecided. What would you, the seasoned veterans purchase if you were starting from scratch as I am? My FZ-20 was kind to me last year, but am ready to upgrade just a little. Here is my gallery of FZ-20 macros from last year: http://www.perceptions.smugmug.com/gallery/717675
Ken
0
Comments
I'm excited about the new Nikon 105mm also. I'm a Nikon shooter with only a D70s right now but looking forward to a D200 after tax money. I too like the ruggedness (I believe) of the D200 (for the price). I've had a half dozen nikon bodies over the years and I'm comfortable with their build quality and optics (although I have also bought third-party brands).
The ONLY thing that tempts me about Canon is their low light performance - an edge over the D200 I believe.
I'd take the Canon 5D over the Nikon D200, if price wasn't an issue - which it is for me! But hands-down, the D200 would win over the 20D (for me).
I knew, of course, that trees and plants had roots, stems, bark, branches and foliage that reached up toward the light. But I was coming to realize that the real magician was light itself.
Edward Steichen
Ahhhh, the grass is greener syndrome.
"Tis better keep your mouth shut and be thought of as an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Plus, that new R1 wireless Close-up speedlight.mmmmmmmmmmmmmm...I think you would love that for macro.
I have an old AI 105 macro in the lab and "borrow" it often, an old, but still very nice piece of glass. It's nice that D2H is smart and can work with old non-CPU lenses.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
John, do you find the R1 too bulky to hike around with taking pics handheld? I take most of my pics without support while hiking in parks/wilderness areas. Is it as bulky as it looks? Then again, what good macro flash setup is not bulky?
One other question; I see many members prefer macro lenses in the 150-180mm range, but are these practical for handheld shots?
Ken
tristansphotography.com (motorsports)
Canon 20D | 10-22 | 17-85 IS | 50/1.4 | 70-300 IS | 100/2.8 macro
Sony F717 | Hoya R72
It may be a tie between those lenses, but the Tokina which you might have overlooked is alleged to be a winner out of the 100mm-ish group.
I've tried the Canon 100mm on a 20D, click here for some samples:
http://matthewsaville.smugmug.com/gallery/261021/1/12934817/Large
http://matthewsaville.smugmug.com/gallery/261021/1/12934818/Large
A very respectable sharpness, I think.
However while most all of the macro lenses "do their job" in that they are darn sharp at 1:1, I have not been satisfied with just that. To be more specific, I've been un-satisfied with the AF of the lenses that arent USM / SWM / HSM. (Don't be fooled by the Canon, it has "ring type" USM that is nowhere near as fast as for example the 70-200 L's!) ...and I have not heard good things about infinity sharpness of some lenses particularly the old Nikon 105 AF.
Which is why I went with the Sigma 150mm HSM. It does it's 1:1 macro job flawlessly, but it also has not just usable AF- it has fantastic AF that performs flawlessly. And not only is it high-performance, it has one added benefit that you would never think of: When you're shooting macro at 1:1, and then you raise your camera to shoot at infinity and try to AF, instead of waiting for the camera to AF from 1:1 to infinity, which can take a while no matter how fast the lens is, you just grab the focus and move it to infinity, without having to flip any switches or ruin any motors. It's very convenient, and it's one thing I hate about non- USM / SWM / HSM lenses, the need to flip a switch to go from AF to MF. However if you do have that advantage, you can set your camera to AF-ON via a thumb button instead of your trigger finger, and effectively you have full-time AF and full-time MF without flipping any switches. One thing that saves me a LOT of grief when shooting macro; because I hated to carefully manual focus a 1:1 macro shot and then press the shutter and have AF kick in and ruin the shot, but I also hated to have to flip a switch on the lens or on the camera, and keep track of which was in what position...
I think I've rambled enough. My advice: First go test whichever camera & lens youre thinking of buying, and if the functions (such as AF & MF ) are intuitive and easy to use then you've got a winner, but if you thing "gaah, this is going to annoy!" then look elsewhere. I don't know the specs on each individual macro lens, all I know is that the Sigma 150mm and 180mm are the only two lenses that have a true HSM AF system in them, until the new Nikon with its SWM... It weighs a bit more, that's for sure, but it doubles as a telephoto lens...
Take care,
-Matt-
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Matt,
Two things....
1) do you handhold this Sigma 150mm or is it to heavy for that?
2) Where can I get an online resource to learn about these lens acronyms (USM/SWM/HSM).
Ken
I really like the 105mm macro...nice and sharp. The 200mm one is supposed to be good..but I haven't ever played with it.
HSM - Sigma - http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses.asp#hsm
SWM - Nikon - http://support.nikontech.com/cgi-bin/nikonusa.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=2596&p_created=1053428342&p_sid=PCN8N-1i&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MiZwX3Byb2RzPTAmcF9jYXRzPTAmcF9wdj0mcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHlwZT1hbnN3ZXJzLnNlYXJjaF9ubCZwX3BhZ2U9MSZwX3NlYXJjaF90ZXh0PXN3bQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1
USM - Canon - http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=CanonAdvantageTopicDtlAct&id=2648
http://www.SnortingBullPhoto.com
http://www.sportsshooter.com/cherskowitz
"There's no reason to hurry on this climb...as long as you keep the tempo at the right speed the riders will fall back."
Ken,
I don't have much practical experience, but the theory is that the longer the focal length, the greater the working distance. The greater the working distance, the easier it should be to hand-hold in the fore-aft position, but the more difficult it is to hold side-to-side and up-and-down, so shake becomes more of an issue.
Most folks don't like the 50-70mm macros because they are so touchy in the fore-aft positioning. The sweet spot (most usable) seems to be between 80mm and 180mm, from the folks I read about.
I think I got all that correct.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
With the on-board flash is on and that big ring around the big lens will cast shadow on the subject; wouldn't it?
Aside from the ring-light, this is one of the coolest D200 features. Where you needed 3 flashes before - 1 in the hot-shoe to act as the master/commander, and 2 on either side for even fill - you can now get the same effect with the on-board.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
It seems a consensus among all the research I have done that the MT-24EX is considered the best macro flash and also that the 150-180mm macros give you more working distance.
However, the problem I am having is determining if these would make the camera too heavy/bulky to handhold. Keep in mind that most of my photo jaunts are 4-6 hours in length and my arms don't exactly look like Mr. Universe. Would that extra pound of say a 150 or 180mm lens make much difference, or should I use my monopod more or Lord V's beanpole idea? Or perhaps that extra pound wil make a difference and the 150-180mm should be restricted to monopod/tripod.
So basically, those of you who use a 150-180mm setup, could you comfortably take handhelds for this period of time or are these best for tripod use?]
Ken
But they could after packing this bad-boy setup around for 4-6 hours
Seriously, one thought that I haven't seen anyone else mention.
While a 180mm macro does give you more reach (longer working distance as someone made reference to) won't you also have a "more shallow" (or less) depth of field with the longer lens???
I've always thought that with DoF being so critical in macro photography, that the 105mm would be the best compromise. And it's a little less expensive to get a slightly faster lens with the 105mm models.
But I've been waaay wrong before so someone tell me the fault of this logic.
I knew, of course, that trees and plants had roots, stems, bark, branches and foliage that reached up toward the light. But I was coming to realize that the real magician was light itself.
Edward Steichen
Erik,
I believe this macro flash kit is being sold with the SU-800 which is the wireless controller that fits in the hot shoe. This will allow you to control up to three different groups of flashes independently. Imagine being able to control the power output of three different flash heads on your micro lens. By adjusting the power output, you may be able to avoid the flat lighting so commonly seen in macro photography. You can see the wireless controller SU-800 in this picture.
I'm looking into buying just the SU-800 to control my off camera SB's for my portrait work. The price ($280) is discouraging me right now.
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
I agree though, $280 is about the same price as another SB800, which is darn smart little piece of kit on its own.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Should be a great lens. Right now I use a 60mm micro with a ring flash for most of my surgical photos and oral cavity photos. The 105mm with VR would be a great lens for my work. Can someone say "business expense?":D
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
I agree. It makes more sense to just buy an SB800 or 600 for the money. My problem is that I really want to get the flash off the camera totally. I realize that you can just dial the power of the on camera flash way down. I'm told the SU-800 is also smaller and lighter than either SB.
http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
Hi Ken, sorry for taking so long to get back to you.
The Sigma 150mm isn't too heavy, for a telephoto lens, at just under 2 lbs. (30 oz.) I hand-hold it all the time when I'm shooting portraits or anything else that is near infinity and in good light that gives me about 1/60 sec. shutter speed. I have to be "rock steady" and pretend I AM a tripod, but it's dooable...
However, I personally just dislike shooting macro hand-held in general. It's too hasty for me, too hard to frame a shot perfecly at such close distances, even if its a sunny day and I can shoot at 1/1000 sec.
Hence I shoot from a tripod 99% of the time when I'm shooting macro, and I don't reccomend it to you either, especially around 1:1 reproduction. It works in a pinch, and sharp results shouldn't be a problem if you're operating within the general shutter speed "rules"...
I believe someone else had some links for those acronyms. Basically there are two types of AF motors in lenses, slow, noisy ones and fast, silent ones. SWM is Nikon's fast/silent AF motor, HSM is Sigma's, and USM is Canon's. Beware however of two of Nikon's new DX SWM lenses, and quite a few of Canon's USM lenses: they are "ring type" and are basically the slow/noisy AF motors trying to function as the fast/silent type.
Of course, there's really nothing that wrong with the slow/noisy type, and in fact almost ALL of them aren't all that slow, nor too noisy, and just as precise & accurate. But the difference is definitely there and is discernible, and I prefer HSM / SWM / USM if even mostly for it's quietness and "instant manual focus override"-ability.
Take care,
-Matt-
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
As far as 30D vs. D200, unless there was a specific lens that Canon had you wanted I just couldn't understand the logic of even comparing the two. The 30D or 20D is an entirely different (lower) class of camera.
I have made the purchase of a 20d/Sigma 150mm Macro lens....should be receiving it tomorrow
Thanks for the help in deciding.
Ken