Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

FM Forum Rules
Macro World Resource
  

FM Forums | Macro & Still Life | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       end
  

Archive 2015 · Which macro lens to buy

  
 
Dalantech
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · Which macro lens to buy


jongatmosfera wrote:
...So yes, working distance is very important, but the working distance preferred by those who shoot at 1x or below and use only natural light may not work for those who shoot at 2x or higher and are compelled to use flash and must find a way to brace the lens on the same platform the subject is on, and vice versa.


Agreed -it's completely different.




Jan 09, 2016 at 09:42 AM
Julian Nell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · Which macro lens to buy


I think Rossi left


Jan 09, 2016 at 10:55 AM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · Which macro lens to buy


Dalantech wrote:
Not a straw man argument Jack -you simply wrote an opinion piece based on how you shoot and favoring lenses that fit your style of photography. But not everyone is going to want to shoot the way that you do...

This is the last I'll say about that article.



Yes, and if you actually read the article, that is exactly what I said, in the beginning, in the middle, and in the end: I have ranked it in order of the way I shoot. Feel free to re-arrange based on the way you shoot.

Why is this so hard for you to comprehend?

It is pointless to discuss this with you, because either your comprehension is totally lacking, or you still haven't actually read the material.

Jack



Jan 09, 2016 at 03:46 PM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · Which macro lens to buy


jongatmosfera wrote:
I agree. However, let's examine what constitutes "comfortable distance," because it would be simplistic and erroneous to assume that comfortable distance always means a long working distance.

I'm using a Tamron 60mm that gives 1:1 magnification at about 4" working distance, to which I've added 2 sets of extension tubes (136mm total length) to bring me to 3.5x at about 3" working distance, which is quite comfortable for me and allows me to shoot live, active, and unbaited jumping spiders, wasps, and other critters without scaring them away.


Good point.

Therefore, as the article suggests, feel free to re-interpret the factual material contained in the Data Table to suit your own personal needs.

For example, the Zeiss Milvus has the highest ranking of many attributes (resolution contrast, etc.), but I rate it #3 because it is lacking in some elements I personally want.

The working distance of the 180-200mm lenses is a big deal to me, and to be long.

If the shorter distances work for your needs, then re-arrange the hierarchy in your own personal rating system, as suggested.

The purpose of my article was both to give credit to the Sigma, as it is better than any 180-200mm option, but also to juxtapose all of the major lenses together, in one setting, so that all of us fanciers could "rub our chins" and make decisions based on 13 very important factors.

Because you work with some of the tinier arthropods, who can deal with such proximity, the lighter lenses (with shorter focal lengths/working distances) work for you.

I rate the Tamron as #2 in that capacity, right behind the Nikon 105.

You might rate it #1, because of price and weight.



jongatmosfera wrote:
Having satisfied the important element that a macro lens must not require you to be too close to a live subject to the point of scaring it away, the short (but not too short) working distance of my set-up allows me to employ Dalantech's left hand brace technique and to bring the diffuser close to the subject by positioning it above the edge of the lens. (Well, one could always position the diffuser a few inches forward from the edge of a long lens, but that would defeat the purpose of the long working distance provided by the lens.)

So yes,
...Show more

I agree with all of this.

As mentioned, in several places in the article, as well as here on this thread: your mileage may very; important factors *to you* might cause you to re-shuffle the ratings.

The fact that the Sigma can also double as a telephoto might not be of significance to you. The fact that its stats are somewhat higher than the Tamron's might not matter, because of its weight.

There is no possible way on earth for me to create a rating system that can coincide with every single unique photographer, which is precisely why I indicate (at several points) that the reader should use the data on the table, and adjust, to fit his/her own unique way of shooting.

Jack



Jan 09, 2016 at 04:04 PM
John Koerner
Offline
• •
[X]
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · Which macro lens to buy


e6filmuser wrote:
Jack,

I have not studied every word of the arguments but tend to agree with you about focal length for the larger subjects, although, with respect, I think you make too much of separation from the background. Getting enough DOF is more of an issue.


Hi Harold;

It is not possible to raise a nearly 7,000-word opinion without someone else taking exception to "something"


e6filmuser wrote:
For magnifications below 1:1, if find my Kiron 105mm, on m4/3, equivalent to 210mm on FF, suits my needs. At 1:1 I use one of my Printing Nikkors, which are reputed to outperform the MPE-65 at 1:1 At higher magnifications, I will use my Printing Nikkor 150mm or Schneider HM 40mm (reversed) which may out-perform the MPE. (I have no comparisons).


I did not include some of the "exotic" lenses. There is a Schneider macro whose resolution, etc. blows the even the Zeiss out of the water (a Leica that does also). However, it is a 1:4, not a 1:1, and I didn't include it. The Leica is $6000 and didn't include it either. I don't think these are "nature lenses" really, more like studio lenses.

The Voiglander 125mm APO is also a superb macro lens, with 680° of focus throw, but it is an exotic, discontinued piece (with no IS/AF), so I didn't include it either.

The article centered around readily-available, commercial macro lenses that are "all around" nature lenses. This is why the MPE was last. It is *specialized* ... and, while highly-convenient within its specialty of 1:1 - 5:1, it is essentially a paperweight for any other possible nature application while on a hike.

Cheers,

Jack



Jan 09, 2016 at 04:12 PM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · Which macro lens to buy


John Koerner wrote:
I just completed a blog entry about macro lenses, from the perspective of a nature photographer (not studio photographer), partially inspired by a member here (Gorm Tepper), who wrote a wonderful piece about this lens himself (which article I still have bookmarked, as it was really quite informative, and echoed my own sentiments).

Jack


I agree with much that you wrote but you forgot one crucial design feature: The tripod ring, its design or even the total lack of it. I use my macro lenses almost exclusively on a sturdy tripod with a good head and macro rails - and wouldn't want to have to mount the camera on that rig.



Jan 10, 2016 at 01:13 AM
Teper
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · Which macro lens to buy


Hey everyone, seen a few hits on my review from this thread. Hope you enjoyed the read. Ive had the 180mm for a while now and I love it.

Choosing a macro....It all depends on what you are after. There are many good choices on the market. All macros tend to be sharp and distortion free, but what really sets them apart nowadays are features like IS, focus limiters and ultrasonic drives.

The older lenses like the 70mm sigma, 90mm Tamron etc still have great optics, but can be a pain to live with. The newer lenses like the 180/105 OS / IS and tamron 90mm VC bring a new dimension and usability to macros. Depends on your budget... and your heart really...

And for all you hardcore macro-ers wanting 50x life size, there can only be one lens.. 65mm MP-E. Regular macros are much more versitile tho.

Happy shooting! and if you are keen check out my blog.

Gorm



Jan 23, 2016 at 05:09 AM
e6filmuser
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · Which macro lens to buy


Teper wrote:
And for all you hardcore macro-ers wanting 50x life size, there can only be one lens.. 65mm MP-E.


A bit of an oversell on the MPE? More liker a rogue zero!

The MPE has probably had its day, as Canon can no loner repair it.

I purchased a Schneider HM 40 from someone who had about three MPEs and half a dozen HM 40s and found the former to outperform the latter throughout its range. I have not owned an MPE but I have no reason the want to compare, based on my results with the HM40.

Harold



Jan 23, 2016 at 06:15 AM
jasonp1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · Which macro lens to buy


Wow, lots of bitterness in a thread asking about a lens. IMHO, just pick up a macro in the range of 50-105 (good starter macro's for handhold-ability), use the flash you have and alternate between natural light and artificial. #1, you see there are occasions that both are called for and #2 you'll figure out which you like best. There are very few scenarios in photography where "My way is best" applies. Photography by definition is an art and as such, people's likes, dislikes and preferences differ. In general true macro lenses are all sharp (Canon, Sigma, Tamron, and Nikon), their depths of field suffer compared to "regular lenses" and lighting is always an issue. I owned the Canon 60mm macro and loved it. I sold it however so I could get the Canon 100mm 2.8L IS Macro for better working distance. In truth, I wish I had both as there are situations where one would have worked better than the other. If skittish bugs is your target, I'd say get something that allows for a decent working distance (90mm, 100mm or 105mm). If you're shooting mainly static objects the 50-60mm should work fine. With this said, if you learn bug behavior and turn up your ninja skills, you can get some REALLY good shots with the 60mm. For me, learning from experience was my favorite part of macro shooting. Seeing the life and death struggle that goes on every day right in front of our noses was an eye opener. Just look in your yard, you'd be amazed what you'll find.
This was in a bush right by my back door (with ring flash):
http://c1.staticflickr.com/1/733/20206321144_9943d550b2_b.jpg
Also shot in my yard with a 100mm macro and 550ex:
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8057/8185811925_d4d39047bf_b.jpg
Same critter shot with natural light:
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8123/8682742174_3175bbc714_b.jpg
Nocturnal Bugs (some of the most interesting) ALWAYS require artificial light, shot with 100mm macro and on camera flash:
http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5303/5600337539_c9371e0368_b.jpg
Another from the yard with the lowly Yognuo Ring flash:
http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5672/20776431913_8a7fb70c89_b.jpg

Bottom line, experiment, that's the beauty of photography, develop your own style. Get one of the lenses that the guys have mentioned and go to town. Just my .02







Feb 16, 2016 at 10:48 AM
e6filmuser
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · Which macro lens to buy


Jason,

There is no doubt that you can produce superb images.

Re: "their depths of field suffer compared to "regular lenses" and lighting is always an issue":

DOF is a product of effective aperture and magnification, nothing else. I can't comment on the second statement as it has no context and, if it is true, I don't see how you might make it not an issue.

Harold



Feb 16, 2016 at 01:04 PM
jasonp1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · Which macro lens to buy


e6filmuser wrote:
Jason,

There is no doubt that you can produce superb images.

Re: "their depths of field suffer compared to "regular lenses" and lighting is always an issue":

DOF is a product of effective aperture and magnification, nothing else. I can't comment on the second statement as it has no context and, if it is true, I don't see how you might make it not an issue.

Harold

OK



Feb 16, 2016 at 01:34 PM
Julian Nell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · Which macro lens to buy


Hehe


Feb 16, 2016 at 01:59 PM
1       2       3      
4
       end




FM Forums | Macro & Still Life | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.