Macro lenses
I specifically bought a Sigma 50mm F2.8 EX DG Macro for Macro work and I LOVE it! You can generally pick up a new one on eBay for around $250. It has a minimum focusing distance of 7 inches.
I did a lot of research before I bought this lens and it gets excellent reviews.
There are exacples of what I have taken with this lens at http://www.phraug.net/Plants%20&%20Flowers.htm
Many of the flowers on this page were 3-4 mm and the water droplets on the Iris petal were no bigger than 1mm.
There are probably some others I'm forgetting. Except for the Canon 180 (~$1200), prices are reasonable (under $300 to ~$700) - longer focal lengths meaning more working distance and higher cost. I'm eyeing the Sigma 150 - seems like the ideal mix of image quality, working distance, and value.
I tend to appreciate the longer (>100mm) macro lenses for two reasons,
1) It gives more room between the lens and subject, and that allows better placement of lights. This might not matter so much with a true macro ring light, but I don't have one.
2) The greater working distance also makes fine focus easier. Typically, I set the lens focus, and then move the camera and lens back and forth to achive prime focus with the subject. The longer lenses have more "wiggle" room.
canon efs 60mm/2.8 macro
i have the efs-60mm macro and its an excellent lens-the autofocus works well up until extreme maginification,when you need to shift to manual focus-for extra reach i sometimes attach an olympus tcon-17 teleconversion lens,but rarely need to.
its a 1:1 macro,that is a true macro,whereas some lenses masquerade as macros but only reproduce at 1:2 or lower and should be properly called close focussing lenses
Tristan listed most of the major macro lenses. Like Ziggy said, I tend to prefer the longer 150mm or 180mm macros for living subjects. The 100, 150, and 180s are all great lenses. But not cheap, if that is a concern.
But, you said your interest was coins. Flat, 2 dimensional subjects.
You can shoot these quite nicely with extension tubes and a standard 50mm lens for minimal cost.
A 50mm macro lens will also work very nice for coins. They are optimized for flat subjects like coins or stamps.
You can even use a screw on close up adapter element to the front of your camera lens filter threads.. Canon makes a 250D and a 500D that come in various filter thread diameters and act as a bifocal lens for your cameras normal lens. You can use a Canon close up adapter lens on any brand of camera - it is merely a + diopter lens that screws onto the front or you normal lens. The images with it can be quite good. But it will not allow true 1:1 reproduction. But they can be had for less than $100.
Thank you guys so much for your input. I have another question, is it true that lenses do not get cheaper or outdated? That 15-years old Nicon/Canon lenses are as good as new ones? It will really help me to shell out quite a few greenbacks for a nice set ! I basically looking for an excuse :
By the way, not too long ago I bought a $500 coin for a modest $105 (outbidding a non-collector, kinda scary :uhoh ) , just becouse pictures were really poor , not matching at all it's brilliant description.
Thank you guys so much for your input. I have another question, is it true that lenses do not get cheaper or outdated? That 15-years old Nicon/Canon lenses are as good as new ones? It will really help me to shell out quite a few greenbacks for a nice set ! I basically looking for an excuse : ...
Historically, the better lenses from all the major manufacturers, even many lenses from third party manufacturers, do hold their value well, especially if they still mount on modern bodies.
All of the Canon "L" series lenses and most of the Nikon "Nikkor" lenses that are $400 and above hold their value well. As a rule, lenses with a high MTF rating and faster aperture and better focus motor technology, do remarkably well in holding their value.
Manual focus lenses have not held their value, except for some of the Zeiss and Leica lenses, for reasons that are sometimes rather mysterious and trendy.
Lenses from outdated mounts are depressed in value.
Canon FD lenses, and before, are particularly problematic, and will not easily adapt to modern Canon EF (EOS) bodies with high quality results.
It is quite possible that a major advance in imager manufacturing or other development could change all this in a heartbeat. (Not likely, but possible.) Medium format cameras, especially Bronica, have taken a beating, with some exceptions, of course.
(All of the above is very much IMHO and open to conjecture. Your mileage may vary. Trained idiot on a closed track, do not attempt. Not responsible for any loss or gain (or anything else, for that matter. No guarantees and no refunds.):D
ziggy53 (Unless you don't like what you just read, and then my name is "Baldy". Hey, he hasn't been blamed for anything lately.)
All of the Canon "L" series lenses hold their value well.
Medium format cameras, especially Bronica, have taken a beating, with some exceptions, of course.
ziggy53...sounds like you are reading my mind...just did the 645 Bronica to digital swap and took your advice and puchased the 5D with great peice of glass.
The big medium format is on the left...
..for a fun lens I want a macro and here is a great thread. I like the Canon lenses...the one canon "L" series macro 180 f3.5 looks good but I will follow this thread and see what folks chime in with...I love my 'IS' in this lens...do any of the other macro lenses in this thread do an 'IS'?
The Canon 180 f3.5 L is NOT an IS lens. I am not aware of an IS macro lens at this time. I agree it would be an assett,
Gus, the 135f2 L will shoot very nice closeups with extension tubes or screw in + lenses like the 500D. But it will not match the overall performance at 1:1 that the 100f2.8 macro does, because the 100 macro has been optimized for near rather than far, like the 135 f2 L.
The Sigma 150 f2.8 is very sharp and I like it in a studio setting, but it has a switch that must be moved between three different focal distances, and I find this annoying in the garden as I try to track and follow insects as they move around.
Macro lenses were discussed in these threads from the Halls of Wisdom -
Tks PF, that puts that idea to bed...i can buy the sigma 150 for about the same as the canon 100 & you know i'm a canon snob thus this is hurting just pondering over it. Length v's ego...or are they one & the same ?
Just on the subject. Im going to get into this guys....god knows we have the critters about.
Will my 135 f2 prime with ext tubes do well or will i see better results buying a canon 100mm macro lens ?
both are almost equally good. but the 135+tube setup dont give you as much magnification like the 100 or even 100+tube. on the other hand, it gives sharper results. i'll show you an example image if you want
both are almost equally good. but the 135+tube setup dont give you as much magnification like the 100 or even 100+tube. on the other hand, it gives sharper results. i'll show you an example image if you want
i shot with both 135mm+tube and 100mm(with tube or no tube) but to be honest i love the 135's better. these are taken at iso400 to iso1600 (crazy eh!) and f8 to f16. the front is super sharp, the DOF is deep, and the background is super blur.
by the way if you had a long prime (say 200, 300 or 400) that has a relatively close minimum focus distance (say, 5') combine it with a tube you'll get super great macros.
for a much cheaper gear, a Semi D-SLR or PnS camera with a Raynox DCR-250 can also do stunning job. if you do it carefully, it can beat any multi-thousand DSLR gear. i have a couple of images shot with this combo (Sony f828+Raynox M250) but i haven't found them yet. will post as soon as i find them.
Tks PF, that puts that idea to bed...i can buy the sigma 150 for about the same as the canon 100 & you know i'm a canon snob thus this is hurting just pondering over it. Length v's ego...or are they one & the same ?
Going to get a ring flash as well.
Gus, unless you have a specific need for a ring flash - like shooting coins or stamps, or intra-oral dental shots where you do NOT want shadows, I would not recommend the ring flash as the light is so strongly along the shooting axis. It is very good for these kind of work oriented images, but less effective at creating lovely artisitic images in my opinion.
Look at Lord Vetinari's work and TMLs - all shot with standard electronic flashes and a soft box but with the strobe moved at almost 90 degrees to the subject. TML uses a Fong light Sphere and a standard electronic flash.
You can buy a 580ex for substantially less than Canon's ringflash system and it is much more versatile. Use some of the funds to purchase a bracket to move the strobe off-camera and use the ETTL cord necessary to retain ETTL control of the flash.
Here is their shot of their brackets holding the Canon MT-24ex - You can create a similar strobe with a pair of 430exs and an off-camera ETTL cord using one as a Master, and one as a Slave. Or just use one 580ex and a reflector with the other bracket.
Here is their shot of their brackets holding the Canon MT-24ex - You can create a similar strobe with a pair of 430exs and an off-camera ETTL cord using one as a Master, and one as a Slave. Or just use one 580ex and a reflector with the other bracket.
I shoot with the RRS bracket and the MT-24 -you have to order an extra flash bracket but it's worth it. I even sprang for one of the extenders so I can have the primary flash almost directly over the subject when I'm shooting close to or at life size. It works very well for controlling shadows, even when I'm not shooting close. I think it would even work well for the 180mm macro that you use. The only problem that I've had with the MT-24 is that it needs a lot of diffusion -I have a set of Sto-Fens on mine and I still have it set to -2 EV or less most of the time. I'm thinking of stuffing my diffusers with cotton...
Here is a sample shot using the MT-24 as the primary light source for the subject, and the sun as the "fill flash" for the background -I think I had the flash set to -1 1/3 EV...
No, the dragon isn't dead -you just gotta know how to pick the ones that you can sneak up on...
H: It'll clip right onto your Kit Lens. Working distance is a bit small at 2 inches, but the coins won't mind. An object 33x22mm wide will fill the frame.
J: The key is always in the lighting of course, so all you really need is a table lamp of some sort for illumination.
H: Or use the on-board flash with a diffuser (I built my own):
I shoot with the RRS bracket and the MT-24 -you have to order an extra flash bracket but it's worth it. I even sprang for one of the extenders so I can have the primary flash almost directly over the subject when I'm shooting close to or at life size. It works very well for controlling shadows, even when I'm not shooting close. I think it would even work well for the 180mm macro that you use. The only problem that I've had with the MT-24 is that it needs a lot of diffusion
DT,
This is precisely the set up I have been using also - but it works a lot better for side lighting for a 100 macro than the 180. The light just isn't really off to the side enough with the 180mm lens and its greater reach. I used to try to extend one strobe further with a plamp, but this was kind of funky and unreliable to hold the flash stable. It ends up being at least two feet in front of the camera. Unwieldly at best.
I agree about the need for diffusion of some sort to soften the lighting with the MT-24ex. I sometimes use a 3x5 in piece of paper towel ( i have thought of using a 3x5 in piece of platic milk bottle also) taped or velcroed to the top and bottom of the flash tube housing creating a miniature softbox effect for each flash tube of the MT-24ex. The paper extends in a curve over the front of the flash tube about 1 or 2 inches in front of the tube. This creates a larger area of illumination while softening the light at the same time.
If I had an assistant, I would have them hold a SunPak FP38 flat panel flash 6 or 8 inches from the subject off to the side - I like it for macro in particular. It lets me shoot at about f18-f22 when it is about 6 inches from the subject at ISO 100.
canon says it about their Macro lens with 5X megnification it must be a cool thing anyone used it ? it is in my dreams since i read and saw it's megnification power
Thine is the beauty of light; mine is the song of fire. Thy beauty exalts the heart; my song inspires the soul. Allama Iqbal
canon says it about their Macro lens with 5X megnification it must be a cool thing anyone used it ? it is in my dreams since i read and saw it's megnification power
Comments
I specifically bought a Sigma 50mm F2.8 EX DG Macro for Macro work and I LOVE it! You can generally pick up a new one on eBay for around $250. It has a minimum focusing distance of 7 inches.
I did a lot of research before I bought this lens and it gets excellent reviews.
There are exacples of what I have taken with this lens at http://www.phraug.net/Plants%20&%20Flowers.htm
Many of the flowers on this page were 3-4 mm and the water droplets on the Iris petal were no bigger than 1mm.
Kat
P.S. Here's a link to the review at Photozone http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_50_28/index.htm
Bill Brandt
Canon:
50/2.5 (only does 1:2 without the adapter)
60/2.8 EF-S
100/2.8
180/3.5L
Sigma
50/2.8
105/2.8
150/2.8
180/2.8
Tamron
90/2.8
180/3.5
Tokina
100/2.8
There are probably some others I'm forgetting. Except for the Canon 180 (~$1200), prices are reasonable (under $300 to ~$700) - longer focal lengths meaning more working distance and higher cost. I'm eyeing the Sigma 150 - seems like the ideal mix of image quality, working distance, and value.
tristansphotography.com (motorsports)
Canon 20D | 10-22 | 17-85 IS | 50/1.4 | 70-300 IS | 100/2.8 macro
Sony F717 | Hoya R72
1) It gives more room between the lens and subject, and that allows better placement of lights. This might not matter so much with a true macro ring light, but I don't have one.
2) The greater working distance also makes fine focus easier. Typically, I set the lens focus, and then move the camera and lens back and forth to achive prime focus with the subject. The longer lenses have more "wiggle" room.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
i have the efs-60mm macro and its an excellent lens-the autofocus works well up until extreme maginification,when you need to shift to manual focus-for extra reach i sometimes attach an olympus tcon-17 teleconversion lens,but rarely need to.
its a 1:1 macro,that is a true macro,whereas some lenses masquerade as macros but only reproduce at 1:2 or lower and should be properly called close focussing lenses
Longitude: 145° 08'East
Canon 20d,EFS-60mm Macro,Canon 85mm/1.8. Pentax Spotmatic SP,Pentax Super Takumars 50/1.4 &135/3.5,Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumars 200/4 ,300/4,400/5.6,Sigma 600/8.
Tristan listed most of the major macro lenses. Like Ziggy said, I tend to prefer the longer 150mm or 180mm macros for living subjects. The 100, 150, and 180s are all great lenses. But not cheap, if that is a concern.
But, you said your interest was coins. Flat, 2 dimensional subjects.
You can shoot these quite nicely with extension tubes and a standard 50mm lens for minimal cost.
A 50mm macro lens will also work very nice for coins. They are optimized for flat subjects like coins or stamps.
You can even use a screw on close up adapter element to the front of your camera lens filter threads.. Canon makes a 250D and a 500D that come in various filter thread diameters and act as a bifocal lens for your cameras normal lens. You can use a Canon close up adapter lens on any brand of camera - it is merely a + diopter lens that screws onto the front or you normal lens. The images with it can be quite good. But it will not allow true 1:1 reproduction. But they can be had for less than $100.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
By the way, not too long ago I bought a $500 coin for a modest $105 (outbidding a non-collector, kinda scary :uhoh ) , just becouse pictures were really poor , not matching at all it's brilliant description.
All of the Canon "L" series lenses and most of the Nikon "Nikkor" lenses that are $400 and above hold their value well. As a rule, lenses with a high MTF rating and faster aperture and better focus motor technology, do remarkably well in holding their value.
Manual focus lenses have not held their value, except for some of the Zeiss and Leica lenses, for reasons that are sometimes rather mysterious and trendy.
Lenses from outdated mounts are depressed in value.
Canon FD lenses, and before, are particularly problematic, and will not easily adapt to modern Canon EF (EOS) bodies with high quality results.
It is quite possible that a major advance in imager manufacturing or other development could change all this in a heartbeat. (Not likely, but possible.) Medium format cameras, especially Bronica, have taken a beating, with some exceptions, of course.
(All of the above is very much IMHO and open to conjecture. Your mileage may vary. Trained idiot on a closed track, do not attempt. Not responsible for any loss or gain (or anything else, for that matter. No guarantees and no refunds.):D
ziggy53 (Unless you don't like what you just read, and then my name is "Baldy". Hey, he hasn't been blamed for anything lately.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
ziggy53...sounds like you are reading my mind...just did the 645 Bronica to digital swap and took your advice and puchased the 5D with great peice of glass.
The big medium format is on the left...
..for a fun lens I want a macro and here is a great thread. I like the Canon lenses...the one canon "L" series macro 180 f3.5 looks good but I will follow this thread and see what folks chime in with...I love my 'IS' in this lens...do any of the other macro lenses in this thread do an 'IS'?
Will my 135 f2 prime with ext tubes do well or will i see better results buying a canon 100mm macro lens ?
Gus, the 135f2 L will shoot very nice closeups with extension tubes or screw in + lenses like the 500D. But it will not match the overall performance at 1:1 that the 100f2.8 macro does, because the 100 macro has been optimized for near rather than far, like the 135 f2 L.
The Sigma 150 f2.8 is very sharp and I like it in a studio setting, but it has a switch that must be moved between three different focal distances, and I find this annoying in the garden as I try to track and follow insects as they move around.
Macro lenses were discussed in these threads from the Halls of Wisdom -
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=25165&highlight=macro+Pathfinder
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=16632&highlight=macro+Pathfinder
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Going to get a ring flash as well.
both are almost equally good. but the 135+tube setup dont give you as much magnification like the 100 or even 100+tube. on the other hand, it gives sharper results. i'll show you an example image if you want
135mm+tube
http://www.pbase.com/phuongtk/image/63395457
http://www.pbase.com/phuongtk/image/63395463
http://www.pbase.com/phuongtk/image/63395469
http://www.pbase.com/phuongtk/image/63395454
i shot with both 135mm+tube and 100mm(with tube or no tube) but to be honest i love the 135's better. these are taken at iso400 to iso1600 (crazy eh!) and f8 to f16. the front is super sharp, the DOF is deep, and the background is super blur.
100mm no tube. i put it here just for comparision. i dont like it much..
http://www.pbase.com/phuongtk/image/63539898
70-200mm at 200mm, no tube (not sure if it can be called "macro" lol... close up maybe)
http://www.pbase.com/phuongtk/image/63428791
by the way if you had a long prime (say 200, 300 or 400) that has a relatively close minimum focus distance (say, 5') combine it with a tube you'll get super great macros.
for a much cheaper gear, a Semi D-SLR or PnS camera with a Raynox DCR-250 can also do stunning job. if you do it carefully, it can beat any multi-thousand DSLR gear. i have a couple of images shot with this combo (Sony f828+Raynox M250) but i haven't found them yet. will post as soon as i find them.
http://www.photoportfolios.net/portfolio/pf.cgi?a=vp&pr=18703&b=up&st=1&la=59&ph=28&sid=17170&pi=RONNIE&u=17170
http://www.photoportfolios.net/portfolio/pf.cgi?a=vp&pr=23906&b=up&st=1&la=59&ph=15&sid=17170&pi=RONNIE&u=17170
Look at Lord Vetinari's work and TMLs - all shot with standard electronic flashes and a soft box but with the strobe moved at almost 90 degrees to the subject. TML uses a Fong light Sphere and a standard electronic flash.
You can buy a 580ex for substantially less than Canon's ringflash system and it is much more versatile. Use some of the funds to purchase a bracket to move the strobe off-camera and use the ETTL cord necessary to retain ETTL control of the flash.
I like the strobe brackets from Really Right Stuff
Here is their shot of their brackets holding the Canon MT-24ex - You can create a similar strobe with a pair of 430exs and an off-camera ETTL cord using one as a Master, and one as a Slave. Or just use one 580ex and a reflector with the other bracket.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
The letters below are exactly 1/4" brass (about 8mm)
http://www.flickr.com/groups/raynoxdcr250/
I shoot with the RRS bracket and the MT-24 -you have to order an extra flash bracket but it's worth it. I even sprang for one of the extenders so I can have the primary flash almost directly over the subject when I'm shooting close to or at life size. It works very well for controlling shadows, even when I'm not shooting close. I think it would even work well for the 180mm macro that you use. The only problem that I've had with the MT-24 is that it needs a lot of diffusion -I have a set of Sto-Fens on mine and I still have it set to -2 EV or less most of the time. I'm thinking of stuffing my diffusers with cotton...
Here is a sample shot using the MT-24 as the primary light source for the subject, and the sun as the "fill flash" for the background -I think I had the flash set to -1 1/3 EV...
No, the dragon isn't dead -you just gotta know how to pick the ones that you can sneak up on...
Looking for tips on macro photography? Check out my Blog: No Cropping Zone.
J: Like suggested already, just get the Raynox DCR-250 Close Up Lens (+8 diopters). $41 at Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002YBXBY/qid=1137642964/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-0558605-1475857?n=507846&s=electronics&v=glance
H: It'll clip right onto your Kit Lens. Working distance is a bit small at 2 inches, but the coins won't mind. An object 33x22mm wide will fill the frame.
J: The key is always in the lighting of course, so all you really need is a table lamp of some sort for illumination.
H: Or use the on-board flash with a diffuser (I built my own):
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=14294263
A couple of examples of the DCR-250 on the Kit Lens...
J&H
Lovely closeups, nicely demonstrating the importance of lighting, rather than lenses.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
DT,
This is precisely the set up I have been using also - but it works a lot better for side lighting for a 100 macro than the 180. The light just isn't really off to the side enough with the 180mm lens and its greater reach. I used to try to extend one strobe further with a plamp, but this was kind of funky and unreliable to hold the flash stable. It ends up being at least two feet in front of the camera. Unwieldly at best.
I agree about the need for diffusion of some sort to soften the lighting with the MT-24ex. I sometimes use a 3x5 in piece of paper towel ( i have thought of using a 3x5 in piece of platic milk bottle also) taped or velcroed to the top and bottom of the flash tube housing creating a miniature softbox effect for each flash tube of the MT-24ex. The paper extends in a curve over the front of the flash tube about 1 or 2 inches in front of the tube. This creates a larger area of illumination while softening the light at the same time.
If I had an assistant, I would have them hold a SunPak FP38 flat panel flash 6 or 8 inches from the subject off to the side - I like it for macro in particular. It lets me shoot at about f18-f22 when it is about 6 inches from the subject at ISO 100.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Welcome to undescovered world
canon says it about their Macro lens with 5X megnification
it must be a cool thing anyone used it ? it is in my dreams since i read and saw it's megnification power
My Gallery
Byron M.
SmugMug Technical Account Manager
Travel = good. Woo, shooting!
nickwphoto
Thanks for the kind words Byron.
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
H: I figure I'll be around more as I get my DSLR outfitted.
J: I agree with you on the Ringlight. There are better options for general macro photography.
H: A while back I posted a thread on the diffusers I made/use. I think your twinlights would benefit greatly...
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=7868
J: The MPE-65 is definitely on my short list. I've coveted that lens for many years. It's good to see a number of folks around here using it.
H: See y'all around.
J&H
...pics..