What macro lens? (1 Viewer)

[Wildman]

Hi ALL
Can anyone please give me some advice on what macro lens i would need for taking photos of small beetles.
My camera is a 30D.
At the moment i have a canon EF100mm F2.8 macro usm for butterflies and dragonflies, but i cannot get as close as i would like with this lens.

Cannon have a EF-S 60mm F2.8 macro usm, will this lens be what i need?
Any info will be great.
Many thanks

 

[andrew_s]

Pretty much all proper macro lenses focus as close as a 1:1 ratio and no closer, so a 5mm beetle has a 5mm image on the sensor.
Using the 60mm will get the lens closer, but as it's a shorter focal length lens the image won't be any bigger, and you will have more problems with lighting and frightening the beetles. You are better off with the 100mm that you've got.

If you want a bigger image, you need an extension tube (or a set of them). This will allow closer focussing, and be cheaper than a new lens (though not by all that much if you get Canon tubes).

Just a thought: the 100mm f2.8 macro apparently has a focus stop at 0.25x - you have released it?

 

[Rob Chace]

Hi ALL
Can anyone please give me some advice on what macro lens i would need for taking photos of small beetles.
My camera is a 30D.
At the moment i have a canon EF100mm F2.8 macro usm for butterflies and dragonflies, but i cannot get as close as i would like with this lens.

Cannon have a EF-S 60mm F2.8 macro usm, will this lens be what i need?
Any info will be great.
Many thanks

What about a Sigma 180 or 150mm macro? Both give 1:1 ratio & the extra length (giving greater working distance) is better for skittish butterflies & dragonflies. Both i understand are the dogs danglies although the 150mm is a faster lens at f2.8.
regards Rob.

 

[Leif]

To add to the good information already given, assuming you mean that the image of the beetle is not large enough, then you can get greater magnification with a diopter lens screwed on to the front of your macro lens. The effect is similar to using extension tubes, but it is a bit more convenient IMO. Canon and Nikon both make good quality diopters. I would avoid most if not all other brands.

What you will find is that depth of field will be very shallow.

 

[Wildman]

Thanks Guys for all your replys.
What i am looking for is a larger image of the beetle.
Looks like i might as well keep my 100mm macro lens and look into the diopter lens and extension tubes.
I do like the sound of the diopter lens,but do not know anything about them.
I will have to make some enquries.

Many Thanks

 

[tjsimonsen]

A slightly expensive possibility is the Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro. It goes up to 5:1 mag.

Thomas

 

[Adey Baker]

I do like the sound of the diopter lens,but do not know anything about them.
I will have to make some enquries.

Basically, they reduce the focus distance of your lens - focus to infinity, put on a (say) 40cm close-focus 'filter' and the lens then focusses from 40cm downwards.

 

[Wildman]

Thanks guys for your replys.

 

[impotentspider]

A Dioptre lens will degrade the image slightly, more if you have UV filters permanently on the front of your lens. Extension tubes on the other hand do not contain glass and have absolutely no effect on the quality of the image.

Have a look at my gallery;

http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/48441

The macro shots were all taken with an old Tamron 90mmSP 1:2macro using various extension tubes on a 6mp Pentax *istD. The images have been further cropped by about 1/3rd, the greenbottle has gained a commendation in a competition.
All have been printed out to A4 size and are superb quality.

I have said this somewhere before in a similar thread, I would normally rate my Pentax glass as the best I have ever used but the Tamron leaves me amazed everytime I use it.

Quick Edit.....the Tamron also has a Hoya UV filter permanently attached.

 

[Leif]

A Dioptre lens will degrade the image slightly, ...

Extension tubes on the other hand do not contain glass and have absolutely no effect on the quality of the image.

In a literal sense that is true. However, by mounting an extension tube you are using the lens outside of its design range, and some lenses do not work at all well with tubes, and produce very soft images. Zooms tend to be the worst. With a good quality macro prime lens, tubes can work very well indeed.

With a diopter you need to stop the lens down to get the best image quality, but you do that anyway to get depth of field.

By all accounts the Tamron lens is excellent, as are some others:

http://www.nnplus.de/macro/Macro100E.html

Leif

 

[Cyclops]

you can get an adaptor that will allow you to reverse atttach a 50mm lens onto your 100mm to give you 2X lifesize.(100/50=2)
Basically the 50mm acts like a highly corrected close up lens, and the quality is superb(you can use any 50mm lens too!)

 

[Cyclops]

In a literal sense that is true. However, by mounting an extension tube you are using the lens outside of its design range, and some lenses do not work at all well with tubes, and produce very soft images.

Leif

Also with extension tubes there is considerable light loss as the lens is moved further away, in accordance with what is known as the inverse square law.
(Basically this means that if you move the lens 50mm away the light level falls off more than the expected 2x)

and most lenses when used on extension tubes are better off used in reverse, the quality is far better this way. But go smaller than 50mm and things dont add up as wide angles are not symetrical. I.e the rear element is smaller than the front, so when mounted in reverse it now has a snaller aperture.

 

[postcardcv]

Just thought I'd do a quick test to show the effect of adding extension tubes to a macro lens. First shot is taken with a 400D with a Sigma 105 f2.8 at (roughly) as close as it will focus. The second shot is the same set up but with stacked 12mm, 20mm and 36mm extension tubes added. I took the shots of a ruler as it gives a clear indication of scale (it's not a scientific test, but gives and idea of what you get with tubes).

 

[itstooflathere]

hi, if you looking for a macro i would say go for the tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 1:1, this lens has been in my hand for 3 years now and its a stunner, to put it in AF or M just push or pull the focus ring, you can pick them up on ebay for a good price, the focus isn't the fastest about but boy what photos, this lens i will keep as long as i have a hole in my bottom, i have a 300d i think you said you have a 30d, the AF is pin sharp, have fun regards carl

 

[Cyclops]

I would have to agree about the Tamron,I don't have one but its the macro lens I always aspired to way back in the 80s. Back then I think it was the only macro that had 9 aperture blades to give a better bokeh,(that's the out of focus parts of an image).
Having said that I have a cheap Vivitar 100/3.5 that costs around £100 (got mine free!) And its superb. It uses a supplementary lens to go to 1:1 but its still as sharp,and you don't use AF with macro anyway.

 

[itstooflathere]

I would have to agree about the Tamron,I don't have one but its the macro lens I always aspired to way back in the 80s. Back then I think it was the only macro that had 9 aperture blades to give a better bokeh,(that's the out of focus parts of an image).
Having said that I have a cheap Vivitar 100/3.5 that costs around £100 (got mine free!) And its superb. It uses a supplementary lens to go to 1:1 but its still as sharp,and you don't use AF with macro anyway.

hi yes this does have 9 blades and the out of focus back grounds is very good, and if you can use m focus without looking at the viewfinder you must be good, the AF is far better than my eyes with butterflys which don't like to hang about too long AF is the fastest it also keeps your hand alway from the butterfly, m focus is better for slower movers like lizards, if you can use the AF points with speed you can get great shots, all goes down on what F number you are useing, not beeing funny but there is no law in use AF or M with macro.

regards carl

 

[Cyclops]

hi yes this does have 9 blades and the out of focus back grounds is very good, and if you can use m focus without looking at the viewfinder you must be good, the AF is far better than my eyes with butterflys which don't like to hang about too long AF is the fastest it also keeps your hand alway from the butterfly, m focus is better for slower movers like lizards, if you can use the AF points with speed you can get great shots, all goes down on what F number you are useing, not beeing funny but there is no law in use AF or M with macro.

regards carl

Oh sorry, i just hardly ever use AF on my canon film camera, (and yet I prefer to use AF on my digi, the MF option on that cam is just not that good.)
I guess it depends on your definiton of macro-true macro involves getting really close and MF is the only option in that case.(When your DOF measures in mms theres no way AF is gonna cope!)
For butterflies youre better off with a longer macro lens, say 180mm, or even a regular telephoto zoom would do. I have got some shots that I have taken with my 75-300 on the canon, and if I put a supplemtary lens on the front I can get really good close ups from afar.

 

[andrew_s]

hi, if you looking for a macro i would say go for the tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 1:1

The OP already has a Canon 100/2.8 macro lens. What he wanted was info on going closer than 1:1.

Macro lenses are designed for macro work, so comments about being used outside their design parameters when used with extension tubes or the advisability of reversing the lens don't really apply.


The basic choices are:
a) extension tubes
b) close up/diopter lens (on filter thread)
c) Canon MP-E 65 lens

a) loses light as the lens is moved further away from the sensor.
b) reduces image quality, by an amount that depends on how good the closeup lens is.
c) is expensive (£700), and is a specialised bit of kit that isn't any good for general use as it's close-up only. It's really for studio rather than field, and is not easy to use (DOF at 5x wide open is 0.048mm, improving to 0.269mm at f16). The next step after this would be a microscope.
See http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/macro.html for info on use.

 

[Cyclops]

Well if you want to go closer you can reverse a lens onto the macro lens and get acceptable results,but to go really close you can get so called true macro lenses,which are specially designed for above life size work,and are usually used on bellows,but like extension tubes there's gonna be a lot of light loss. You can also use microscope lenses with an adaptor from srbfilm.com but at this range you'll be in a studio with bright lights and flash guns so you could get away with extension tubes or bellows. Next stage of course is a microscope and thats a whole different kettle of fish. For info on photomicroscopy from a site i visit- www.photomacrography2.net

 

[itstooflathere]

Oh sorry, i just hardly ever use AF on my canon film camera, (and yet I prefer to use AF on my digi, the MF option on that cam is just not that good.)
I guess it depends on your definiton of macro-true macro involves getting really close and MF is the only option in that case.(When your DOF measures in mms theres no way AF is gonna cope!)
For butterflies youre better off with a longer macro lens, say 180mm, or even a regular telephoto zoom would do. I have got some shots that I have taken with my 75-300 on the canon, and if I put a supplemtary lens on the front I can get really good close ups from afar.

hi yes you right for tight in close ups AF is best switched off but its down to what you are taking, my 90mm is great for butterflys as long as i don't make sudden movements, if you take it easy you can get right up to them, its the same with lizards, if you find 1 it may run off but it will come out to warm up again, its the same with snakes saturday i had some great fun with grass snakes but this time useing my sigma 50-500mm lens, sit still and they will come out, my next target is to macro a grass snake to get a close head shot, i think the best 180mm macro lens is made by tamron but is about £600 i think, but i'm having great fun with the 90mm, i always try and get not just the butterfly but what it is sitting on or feeding on it makes for an alround shot,

regards carl