| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/02/2010 09:43:20 PM · #1 |
| Hi can anyone advise me about what is a good lens to get into macro? I have a 7D and I am looking at 100mm macro lens but not sure if I should get the 180mm or is there a better option out there??? |
|
|
|
10/02/2010 10:10:09 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by brookecoltz:
Hi can anyone advise me about what is a good lens to get into macro? I have a 7D and I am looking at 100mm macro lens but not sure if I should get the 180mm or is there a better option out there??? |
There are no better options than the 100mm or the 180mm. Get whichever you can afford and you won't regret it. (I have the 180mm personally, but the new 100mm with IS sounds very tempting). |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 03:13:34 AM · #3 |
| I'm leaning more towards the 100mm IS. What are thoughts on the MP 65mm??? |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 05:26:00 AM · #4 |
I don't know about the 180 or the 65, but I adore the 100mm.
I'd tend toward the 100 because it's an excellent lens for other uses. I use it for a portrait lens when I'm outside, heck, I use it for anything I can. It is by far the sharpest of all my lenses. It's truly amazing.
No, I'm not affiliated with canon. I wish they gave me a kickback on lenses sold, however. :)
Message edited by author 2010-10-03 09:26:28.
|
|
|
|
10/03/2010 05:31:26 AM · #5 |
IMO I think that you need to really look at the ratio...me I really like to get a 1:1 ratio in my shots and alot of the lens you can't get that without an extension tube (which is fine) so what kind of Macro are you looking to do...because I can get some beautiful pictures with my 50mm that aren't IMO "Macro"...
So my question is "How are you going to use it" (Lens) |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 05:37:49 AM · #6 |
| The 100mm macro is a beautiful lens. You wouldn't be disappointed. Are you going to be mainly shooting subjects that you are comfortable getting close (6-8 inches) to or do you want to have a bit more room to work with? If you want to get macro without being that close you may want the 180 but you can't go wrong with either one. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 05:39:17 AM · #7 |
| Perhaps Jason will chip in but I have a 180mm macro (albeit the well-regarded Sigma clone). I've found using the lens isn't about using the a lens at all, it's about using the lens, a tripod and often a macro flash. A tricky beast to be sure. It is very slow focussing, forces manual focus for bugs. It is my choice of lens for flower work but for bugs, I wish I'd bought something shorter. I do have the 50mm f/2.5 and this is great for photographing my fish - the short length means it can tolerate a bit of angular movement. If I were buying again tomorrow I'd buy the 100mm IS. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 05:57:48 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Perhaps Jason will chip in but I have a 180mm macro (albeit the well-regarded Sigma clone). I've found using the lens isn't about using the a lens at all, it's about using the lens, a tripod and often a macro flash. A tricky beast to be sure. It is very slow focussing, forces manual focus for bugs. It is my choice of lens for flower work but for bugs, I wish I'd bought something shorter. I do have the 50mm f/2.5 and this is great for photographing my fish - the short length means it can tolerate a bit of angular movement. If I were buying again tomorrow I'd buy the 100mm IS. |
That is a great point. I just started bug hunting but I can't use a tripod when doing that so I hand hold everything, kinda hard to lay on the ground and crawl up to a subject with a tripod. I can handhold the 100mm decent enough but I don't think I could with the 180, at least not with many decent results. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 06:00:44 AM · #9 |
| It does of course have the advantage of giving you a bit more space to shoot from - you don't have to be on top of your subject to get good results. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 06:54:01 AM · #10 |
Actually I have been really enjoying my Sigma 180 (bought on recommendation from Paul!!) although the Sigma 150 is also quite tempting (scored 9.6/10 on Fred Miranda). It is showing up the limitations of my cheap tripod though, but so incredibly sharp.
Incidentally I have been using the AF for bugs (moving in the breeze) with it set to AI Servo in camera, and getting some pretty reasonable results. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 07:05:58 AM · #11 |
Macro lenses generally have "flat field" optics, meaning that the area in focus is flat like a sheet of paper, instead of curved, like the inside of a ball. I use both 55 and 105 macro lenses, (Nikon, manual,) and agree that they do a great job as general purpose lenses as well as having the ability to get in close on small subjects. If I want to shoot little critters, I sometimes add a 2X telextender to the 105 and I can get the shots with enough working distance to not distract the critters. The 55 is great for small flowers and plants.
I generally use a monopod when shooting "walk around" macro. It offers much better freedom of movement than with a tripod, but still helps a lot with camera shake and with framing and focusing. The monopod allows me to set the focus on the lens, then rock in or out to get the focus right where I want it.
Surprisingly enough, a good little P&S cam can do very good macro too, but they don't offer the control over DOF that you get with a DSLR and most don't support RAW format.
ETA
If you just want to dabble with macro, you can use your 50mm reversed. I think that someone posted a tutorial about that.
You can also get a set of thread on "close up" lenses, which are like a magnifying glass that screw in the filter threads on a lens.
A third option is to get a set of extension tubes, that go between the lens and the camera. With the Canon E lenses, you would have to get the "full auto" types which have the electrical connections for the lens aperture to operate properly.
Message edited by author 2010-10-03 11:12:03.
|
|
|
|
10/03/2010 07:19:28 AM · #12 |
I had this decision about 8 or 9 months ago. I ended up with the new 100L macro. Like you I have the 7D and the lens works great with the camera. One nice feature they added to the 7D was how AI Servo works when you have a USM macro lens attached. With this new feature and the IS in the lens, hand held 1:1 photos are possible (better if you are using some sort of external flash set up).
Here is a good example of a hand held shot with the lens 
Message edited by author 2010-10-03 11:20:09.
|
|
|
|
10/03/2010 08:03:56 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Perhaps Jason will chip in but I have a 180mm macro (albeit the well-regarded Sigma clone). I've found using the lens isn't about using the a lens at all, it's about using the lens, a tripod and often a macro flash. A tricky beast to be sure. It is very slow focussing, forces manual focus for bugs. It is my choice of lens for flower work but for bugs, I wish I'd bought something shorter. I do have the 50mm f/2.5 and this is great for photographing my fish - the short length means it can tolerate a bit of angular movement. If I were buying again tomorrow I'd buy the 100mm IS. |
I love my 180mm, but you probably get used to what one uses. To me, the working distance makes up for the heft. All macros are slow to focus and I hardly ever use autofocus. Still, I mainly work with cooled bugs or slow moving bugs and a tripod. I can handhold, but agree it's some work.
The new 100mm which has two plane IS, I think would be fun to try. If I understand correctly, the second plane would be in and out stabilization so you can keep the DOF where you want it while handholding. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 08:09:06 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by brookecoltz:
What are thoughts on the MP 65mm??? |
The MP-E65 is a unique lens, however it is a macro-only lens and is difficult to use. The *lowest* magnification possible is about 1:1, which is the *largest* magnification possible with most macro lenses. It's more like mounting a microscope on your camera. Literally.
You'll be much better served with a standard macro lens. You cannot go wrong with the 100mm macro. The 180mm is also a great lens, arguable slightly better optically than the 100mm, but it will be a little harder to manage hand-held. If the price doesn't put you off, it is a good option. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 08:27:51 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:
Actually I have been really enjoying my Sigma 180 (bought on recommendation from Paul!!) although the Sigma 150 is also quite tempting (scored 9.6/10 on Fred Miranda). It is showing up the limitations of my cheap tripod though, but so incredibly sharp.
Incidentally I have been using the AF for bugs (moving in the breeze) with it set to AI Servo in camera, and getting some pretty reasonable results. |
Frank - I think I need some lessons!
(And of course the 100mm L wasn't available then ;-))
Message edited by author 2010-10-03 12:30:30. |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 09:28:56 AM · #16 |
| Paul, having seen some of your recent work, you don't need lessons from anyone! My problem with macros now is not the technical side of getting the image, it's getting the little beggars to pose in an interesting way! ;o) |
|
|
|
10/03/2010 11:58:37 AM · #17 |
Thankyou thankyou thankyou for all your helpful replies. I am going to get the new 100mm macro and make my husband buy it for my birthday!!!
I can't wait to get out and take some shots as spring is here in Oz and plenty of flowers and bugs around.
Thankyou again to everyone that replied you saved me from making a mistake and getting the 65mm.
Oh the other question I had is about filters is there specific filter I should use when using a macro lens???
Message edited by author 2010-10-03 16:04:51. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/08/2025 01:29:47 PM EDT.
