So whom here has experience with ..

gus

canons MP-E macro 65mm f/2.8 1-5x ?

Thumbs up...or down ?

luckyrwe

From the images I have seen with it, I want one sooooo bad, but I would need the flash too, and now we're 1/3rd towards a 300/2.8....

Decisions.....

gus

luckyrwe wrote:

From the images I have seen with it, I want one sooooo bad, but I would need the flash too, and now we're 1/3rd towards a 300/2.8....

Decisions.....

I just looked up the flash price....

Do you recon this lens would be wasted without that flash ???

fish

I assume you've read this. Looks like it might be a handful to operate, but you certainly can record fly nosehairs. The thing that would turn me off of it is the focusing distance...it's about a quarter of an inch, which isn't much room to move. It's also about a six year old lens, so I'm not sure how well it will work with modern EOS bodies.

Ach...sorry, no personal experience with it. But if you want to talk about a 100/2.8 macro, I can do that.

gus

fish wrote:

I assume you've read this. Looks like it might be a handful to operate, but you certainly can record fly nosehairs. The thing that would turn me off of it is the focusing distance...it's about a quarter of an inch, which isn't much room to move. It's also about a six year old lens, so I'm not sure how well it will work with modern EOS bodies.

Ach...sorry, no personal experience with it. But if you want to talk about a 100/2.8 macro, I can do that.

They recon it works fine with EOS...& yep its been around a bit.

I am used to my macro at 19mm (3/4") & i like it that way. Thats what macro is in my book.

Andy

Humungus wrote:

They recon it works fine with EOS...& yep its been around a bit.

I am used to my macro at 19mm (3/4") & i like it that way. Thats what macro is in my book.

what's the advantage of that lens over the 100mm canon macro?

gus

andy wrote:

what's the advantage of that lens over the 100mm canon macro?

5:1 over 1:1

patch29

I saw it at PMA last year. It gets closer and magnifies more than any lens I have every seen. It does get dark, but for you and close ups it is awesome, note it is macro only, no regular photo use like the 100 macro which you can still shoot portraits with. This is from memory, but I think that was one major difference between the two and the fact that it gets so close. You would definitely want a macro rail for your tripod with this lens. When I spoke with the Canon rep he recommended their twin light set up over the ringlight. You can move the two heads around and get better control of your lighting. It is and expensive set up, but you would love it. I can't say if the twin light would be the best at super close up. I did not get to use it, but the Canon rep liked it more. Sorry I cannot give you more info. I only played with it briefly. If I can see one here I will take a look and let you know what i see. This is definitely a super-specialized set up. I think you would love it once you get over the cost.

gus

It looks like something that would have to have that specialised flash...& thats nearly the same cost of the lens again.

pathfinder

Humungus wrote:

It looks like something that would have to have that specialised flash...& thats nearly the same cost of the lens again.

There are several shooters with that lens on the macro thread at Fred Miranda, 'gus. A standard macro lens and extension tubes or a 500D close up filter can provide some of what it offers, but not 5:1, maybe 2 or 3:1

patch29

Humungus wrote:

It looks like something that would have to have that specialised flash...& thats nearly the same cost of the lens again.

I think it makes it much easier. If you are creative I would think you could easily figure out how to make two cheap flashes, maybe some diffusion material, some clamps and arms, work well. It will take more time, but once you have a set up it would work well. You loose the E-ttl feature which is nice, but it can be done without it.

Here is a product that would help, you could use reflectors. They require more still and effort, but are a cheap solution.

Here is an article showing it used with reflectors. They do not look as close as you would be with the 65 macro, but you could still figure out how to make it work.

patch29

I was able to take a quick test with a 20D, 65mm dedicated Macro and Canon twinlite macro flash. This is a sweet system.

Here are the results with 20D 1.6x crop, full frame for this camera. These were one shot each, quick and hand held so don't go 100% on my focus. Sorry all I had were US coins, I can measure them later if you are not familar with their size.

At 1X.





At 5x





The L and O files are available, the O's are a bit large, just modify the URL, sorry I am on the run.

pathfinder

patch29 wrote:

I think it makes it much easier. If you are creative I would think you could easily figure out how to make two cheap flashes, maybe some diffusion material, some clamps and arms, work well. It will take more time, but once you have a set up it would work well. You loose the E-ttl feature which is nice, but it can be done without it.

Here is a product that would help, you could use reflectors. They require more still and effort, but are a cheap solution.

Here is an article showing it used with reflectors. They do not look as close as you would be with the 65 macro, but you could still figure out how to make it work.

www.naturephotographers.net sells 2 plamps and two 12 in screens - reflector and diffuser as a macro kit. I just orderd the kit. The website reponds quickly - I ordered my better beamer from them and had it it just a few days via PayPal.

wxwax

pathfinder wrote:

www.naturephotographers.net sells 2 plamps and two 12 in screens - reflector and diffuser as a macro kit. I just orderd the kit. The website reponds quickly - I ordered my better beamer fromthem and had it it just a few days via PayPal.

Intersting, they have some cool stuff, PF. How's that Better beamer working out? Think it would work like a snoot at concerts - limiting where the flash light goes?

pathfinder

wxwax wrote:

Intersting, they have some cool stuff, PF. How's that Better beamer working out? Think it would work like a snoot at concerts - limiting where the flash light goes?

I am sure it would give you more reach - but it is kind of delicate - it is just velcroed together, and whether that would survive in a concert audience population I am not sure. It is also large and sticks up quite a bit above the camra.
The concept is really quite simple - it is a Fresnel lens that bends the peripheral rays of the electronic flash beam more parallel to the axis of the lens. I wonder if the big holder to displace the Fresnel about 6 inches in front of the flash tube is really needed. I suspect that a fresnel could be velcroed right over the front of the flash tube itself and accomplish much of the same thing - but maybe with a more concentrated versus diffuse light quality.

That might actually work bewtter in a concert environment

DoctorIt

Yo Gus, i reckon you know by now, but MP stands for "microscope", that kinda answers it all, no? I really want this lens, but I have a use for it. i could shoot some great stuff in my lab with it. I think that's what its mainly used for - stationary macro. I doubt you could go out into the wild with it, like you could with the 100mm. But if you want more than 1:1, its the only way to go.

gus

patch29 wrote:

I was able to take a quick test with a 20D, 65mm dedicated Macro and Canon twinlite macro flash. This is a sweet system.

Here are the results with 20D 1.6x crop, full frame for this camera. These were one shot each, quick and hand held so don't go 100% on my focus. Sorry all I had were US coins, I can measure them later if you are not familar with their size.

The L and O files are available, the O's are a bit large, just modify the URL, sorry I am on the run.

Thanks for doing that PF

gus

DoctorIt wrote:

Yo Gus, i reckon you know by now, but MP stands for "microscope", that kinda answers it all, no? I really want this lens, but I have a use for it. i could shoot some great stuff in my lab with it. I think that's what its mainly used for - stationary macro. I doubt you could go out into the wild with it, like you could with the 100mm. But if you want more than 1:1, its the only way to go.

Well mate im off to talk to a man about a camera today so once i have it i will start phase II of the Dslr sickness & buy some lenses.

DoctorIt

Humungus wrote:

Well mate im off to talk to a man about a camera today so once i have it i will start phase II of the Dslr sickness & buy some lenses.

woo hoo

patch29

DoctorIt wrote:

Yo Gus, i reckon you know by now, but MP stands for "microscope", that kinda answers it all, no? I really want this lens, but I have a use for it. i could shoot some great stuff in my lab with it. I think that's what its mainly used for - stationary macro. I doubt you could go out into the wild with it, like you could with the 100mm. But if you want more than 1:1, its the only way to go.

If you need more that 1:1 macro with the 100 or other lens you can always add an extension ring that will work well. I would think it would be the best answer for those who need a lens to shoot regular portraits and a lot of macro work. 1:1 is still very tight on the 20d size sensors, I would think the macro ring would get you a lot closer. I would love to have the setup I tested, but not sure if I could swing the money, for me I would go with a 100 or possibly the 180 macro and add an extension ring when I need to get really close.