Seeking Advice on Macro Lens for D-SLR Camera

[letumgo 0]

My wonderful wife got me a Canon EOS XT digital SLR camera for Christmas ( ). I have been playing with taking macro photos with the stock lens that came with the camera, but I know that a true macro lens could do better. Unfortunately I know nothing about lenses and what features to look for in a macro lens. Could you guys give me some pointers in what features to look for in a macro lens?

 

Keep in mind I am a novice (use small words so I can understand). Thanks in advance for the education.

[Mokai 0]

I dont know much about Canon equipment but I have heard good things about this lens..And to me an f/2.8 macro for under $400 is a good deal..

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/3711..._f_2_8_USM.html

 

[troutgeek 0]

Great camera letumgo. You'll love it.

 

The cheapest way to go is to get screw-on magnifier lenses for your current lens. Not great, but it works.

 

Another way is to get extension tubes. Works well, but you will lose light.

 

The best way is to purchase a lens made specifically for macro photography. A great Canon lens is the EF 100 mm macro. Also works great as a portraiture lens. This lens gives you plenty of distance between you and the subject (if photographing insects is a future pleasure), and it is internal focussing (the lens does not shrink or grow when focussing).

 

The only Canon macro lens that I would stay away from is the EF 50 mm macro. A good lens for its time, but old and only capable of 1:2 magnification. Actually, for the price, the EF 50 mm macro is a pretty good deal.

 

My fave, however, is the EF 100. There is an EF 180 mm L macro, the best Canon macro made, but I don't care to spend that much on a lens at this time.

 

The EFS 60 mm, mentioned above, is also a great choice, but it will only work on a cropped camera (Rebels, 20D, 30D, and 40D models). This may not be a big deal if you never plan to get a full format camera (5D, and 1D models).

 

I almost forgot the most important tools for macro photography -- a good tripod and a remote shutter release.

[letumgo 0]

Thanks for the help, Mokai & Troutgeek. I will read up on these options to see what the differences are.

[Wulff 0]

When it comes to Macro lenses there really isnt alot of difference between them. The biggest difference really is how much working distance do you want when going for 1:1.

 

Meaning. At what distance from the subject does the lens acheive 1:1 or more specifically what is each lenses Minimum Focus Distance (MFD). The longer the focal length, the futher away its MFD.

 

Why might that be important:

Insects get spooked, much like anything thats alive. Its survival instinct. So with a longer focal length, your just that much further away, and as such theres less chance of spooking the subject.The more focal length you want, the more your going to have to spend. By way of example: A 100mm has a MFD of about 4 to 6 inches, a 180mm has a MFD of about a foot. Both will produce virtually the same image but with one you have to be 4 inches from the target and with the other about a foot..

 

Another byproduct of having more working distance is that there will be less interfernce with light. Put te sun at 90 degree to your subject, the further away you are, the easier it is to get the shot witout blocking the light or asting a shadow over the subject.

 

That said and out of the way, some lenses you can look at.

Canons 100mm f2.8 and Sigmas 105mm f2.8. Both very similiar, both like any mcro lens really are tack sharp. The sigma cost considerably less.

 

If you want to spend more one of the most popular macro lenses on the market is the Sigma 150mm f2.8. Its not that much more expensive than the Canon 100 f2.8.

 

If you wan to spend even more, theres the Canon and Tamron 180mm f3.5s. Both cost roughly the same, the Tamrons a bit cheaper.

 

Other than that the only thing you should be aware of is that both Sigma and Tamron offer lens that are "labelled" as being "Macro" but are not true macro lenses ( 1:1 magnification). Rather they are standard lenses that can focus on a subject reasonably close. Im not sure but I tihnk they typically acheive a ratio of .5 : 1.

 

 

J

[Will Milne 0]

Hi

 

Macro like most other fields in photography is pretty broad in terms of what you can do/get interested in.

 

 

John is right on regarding working distance and repro ratio. Many macro lenses are really just close focusing lenses. Checking for 1:1 capability is important . Working distance needs depend on what you want to do in macro. If it is insects , the more working distance you have the better, generally.

 

Working distance becomes very important if/when you want to start using additional light sources. If you go with the usual , two or more flashes on brackets setup , there are quite a few options and shorter focal lengths - 50/60 ish all get the job done. Bear in mind the shorter focal lengths tend to be cheaper but there is the added cost of a multi head flash system. Most often folks doing hand held /hard core bug photography go that route. Two reasons mainly- you need to stop down the lens as far as possible to generate suffient depth of field and without flash as the illumination the shutter speeds would be prohibitively slow and second it allows you to generate your own lighting look ( within reason) irrespective of the ambient lighting conditions. So the flash/es become the sole source of illumination.

 

 

If you go a slightly different route - preferring to use a combo of flash and ambient light with a tripod mounted camera- my own preference - then having a good amount of working distance to allow the flash to be used as fill , becomes desirable. In the field I use a hand held flash with either a diffuser attached ( the flash is triggered remotely by the on camera popup flash on my nikon) or the same hand held flash fired through a diffuser panel mounted on a flexible arm to hold it in position ( I like the 5in1 Interfit - it gives gold/silver/white and black reflectors or a translucent diffuser all in one small package) . With this setup I can easily move the flash around without being wired to the cam and hold it in any position, I like to get the fill I want from any angle on the fly. I love digital instant feedback makes it all the more fun. With this setup- a large working distance means a far greater set of options of where the flash can be without the lens interfering.

 

Tripods- get one that allows the legs to lay as flat as possible, in other words goes as low as possible. Cut the center post off as short as possible!! .I like the Slik AMT pro 550, light and solid enough at a reasonable price. Get a Manfrotto or similar super clamp and when needed you can attach your tripod head to it and attach the clamp to anywhere on your tripod legs to give you added flexibility. The super clamp is also what holds the arm for the disc/or flash if you want the flash fixed in position.

 

You will be manually focusing- AF is useless for macro- so an eyepeice magnifier is almost a must.

 

A good shutter release is a neccessity- you want to be working with mirror-up.

 

Hope some of that made sense.

 

Will

[Graham 0]

For the macro stonefly shots I recently posted, I used ambient light, no flash, no tripod, just placed a stonefly on a finger on my left hand and held the camera with my right hand, used auto focus in continuous shooting mode, and fired away. Granted the pics are not super closeup, but they are basically the images I was hoping to capture. They look great printed. I think you will be happy with the lens Mokia posted, for general bug and fish face shots, you can take lots of cool shots, and then, if you want to get into super macro such as insect faces and eye balls, then you'll need to start collecting accessories. Next time I hit a trout stream I'll bring a flash bracket to place my flash forward above the lens.

[letumgo 0]

I truly appreciate your clear explanation of the features and options availible for macro lenses. I think I can now look at macro lenses and understand what options will be most beneficial to my photography.

 

The depth of knowledge on this site never ceases to amaze me. You guys are awesome!!! Thank you.