Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2004 · Canon Macro
  
 
jagsiva
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Canon Macro


I am looking to get a Macro lens for the occasional macro shot. Would I see a big difference between a dedicated macro vs a 500D or similar on one of my existing lenses such as the 300F4 or 70-200F2.8......the Canon 180 is tempting, but I keep thinking that Canon will release this lens with IS in the near-term......


Oct 21, 2004 at 06:02 PM
Nori
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Canon Macro


I have shot with the 500D extensively on my 100-400. With the 500D on 100-400 the lens has a maximum(~34 inches) and minimum(~27 inches) focusing distance, which can be very limiting. But you also save space in your bag by just carrying the filter. The advantage of using a dedicated macro lens is that you have infinite as well as 1:1 focus capability. Quality wise you may not see any difference between using the 500D and a dedicated macro lens depending on how big you print.

500D is extra glass and will effect the picture quality, but not much

Hope that helps

Nori



Oct 21, 2004 at 06:16 PM
grega
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Canon Macro


I don’t have experiences with 500d and 300mm but I would say that you are used to the best quality glass and that dedicated macro lens is best way to go.
But I wouldn’t go with 180mm. For “occasional macro shot” 100mm would be better. It is small, has good AF and is very sharp.



Oct 21, 2004 at 06:42 PM
Dave Baker
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Canon Macro


IS in a macro lens? That seems counterintuitive .... macro is almost always done on a tripod so IS (1) won't help and (2) will marginally degrade image quality.

I have the 50/2.5 compact macro and like it a lot. I'd like to get another in ~ 100 region for completeness (it's often hard to get in real close with the 50).



Oct 21, 2004 at 07:03 PM
jagsiva
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Canon Macro


Acutally, I would think IS could really help with Macro, particularly when you want to use smaller f stops for DOF. I not sure that a tripod is always a viable option for the type of shooting that I ......btw, one of the reasons for considering the 300f/4 or 70-200f2.8 with the 500d is the IS capability...


Oct 21, 2004 at 07:18 PM
Nori
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Canon Macro


Having the IS on while using 300 L IS with 500D would make the subject bounce around in the viewfinder each time the IS is activated. I did use 500D on the 100-400, but turned the IS off.


Oct 21, 2004 at 07:40 PM
gervaise
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Canon Macro


Just get the 100mm macro, it is sharp, relatively light and does an excellent job.


Oct 21, 2004 at 07:44 PM
JZaun
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Canon Macro


jagsiva
I use the Canon 100mm macro f2.8 for most of my flower and butterfly shots plus some Dragonflys. It is a great portriat lens and spends a lot of time on my cam. A lot of my pics are not real 1:1 macro's but just real close ups. ALL hand held.. Go to my site and see (Buggs) and (Flowers), also the only Heron pic I have was with the 100mm, under Ducks and Geese..

Jerry



Oct 21, 2004 at 07:48 PM
jonwienke
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Canon Macro


Nori wrote:
Having the IS on while using 300 L IS with 500D would make the subject bounce around in the viewfinder each time the IS is activated. I did use 500D on the 100-400, but turned the IS off.


The newer Canon lenses have IS that works just fine on a tripod. The 70-200/2.8L IS gives excellent results on a tripod. It's great if it's windy out.



Oct 21, 2004 at 08:00 PM
jagsiva
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Canon Macro


JZaun wrote:
jagsiva
I use the Canon 100mm macro f2.8 for most of my flower and butterfly shots plus some Dragonflys. It is a great portriat lens and spends a lot of time on my cam. A lot of my pics are not real 1:1 macro's but just real close ups. ALL hand held.. Go to my site and see (Buggs) and (Flowers), also the only Heron pic I have was with the 100mm, under Ducks and Geese..

Jerry


Nice pics, I think I'll go try the 100mm....thx, Jag.



Oct 21, 2004 at 08:40 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



traveler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Canon Macro


Well yesterday I became the proud owner of the mother of all Macro lenses. The 180mm F3.5L Macro USM. It is Rolls Royce build all the way, with optics to drool over. It's a good thing I had a towel nearby. I can see I'll have a good time with it. Here however is a shot I took about a year ago with that 500D filter on a 100-400L. It is actually pretty darn useful, especially considering it can easily be handheld with the IS for examples like this one.


http://www.pbase.com/traveler/image/10431335/original.jpg



Oct 21, 2004 at 08:44 PM
J Williams
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Canon Macro


Remember that most macro shots are taken at very small aperatures where most lenses are more alike than different. The real advantage of something like the 100 or 180 macro is they function as a very good normal lens and can also go to life-size without any adapters etc. Using a high quality diopter (check out Nikons 3T, 4T etc., they are cheaper and just as good) with a 70-200 usually gets you into the approx 1/2 life size range. You can also add a 1.4x converter lens to get more magnification.

I have a butterfly shot on my wall taken with a very average consumer 70-200 zoom and quality diopter and I guarantee you it would not look any better with a dedicated macro lens.

I don't know if your 300 is the IS version or not. I have the IS version that already focuses pretty close. With just a 1.4x it gets close enough for butterflies etc.

The bottom line is if you don't need to go much higher than 1/2 life size and you don't need another lens for some other reason, you should try a quality diopter on your 70-200 and it will most likely do everything you need.



Oct 21, 2004 at 08:46 PM
shawn
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Canon Macro


I have a 100 macro and love it. I would like a 180 for wildlife (you don't have to get as close), but am very happy for now. I also have a nikon 6T (akin to the 500D) which I have used on my 70-200IS with much less result. Don't forget, you can use te 500D on your 100 or 180 macro and get some amazing results. A 100 is perfect for flowers and small objects while a 180 is great for live objects that might be scared off.

100mm macro on a back yard fence hand held:
http://www.managersoftware.net/postings/Lizard600.jpg



Oct 21, 2004 at 08:52 PM
jagsiva
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Canon Macro


Thank you all for the info..jag.


Oct 22, 2004 at 02:32 AM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Canon Macro


You can get pretty good pictures with a zoom lens + 500D combo. In fact I was very inspired by Nori's closeup work here on FM that I bought his 500D when he offered it for sale I have used it since on my 70-200 f4L and 100-400IS. The minimum/maximum focussing distance (~50cm) is quite annoying, especially if you're shooting moving objects, but other that, the IS zoom+500D gives me more flexibility that i enjoyed closeup and macro work more than when I was using the 50macro or 100macro.

If you're a dedicated macro/closeup shooter, go for the dedicated macro lenses. Otherwise get an extension tube and/or 500D, and that should satisfy some of the macro cravings for a while



Oct 22, 2004 at 03:32 AM
smaug
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Canon Macro


You should post this question on the Macro forum. You'll get more answers from dedicated macro shooters who know their stuff.
Personally, if I were looking for an inexpensive way to occasionally get closer and already had some good glass (which you obviously do) I'd just get some extension tubes (or just one). You could spend less money and end up with better image quality than using a diopter (no glass elements so no image degradation). Plus with no glass they are nearly indestructible. Oh, and they will fit on every lens you own, unlike filters.

Just my $0.02 worth.

-Steve



Oct 22, 2004 at 03:52 AM
lexvo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Canon Macro


If you would go with a dedicated macro lens for an occassional shot, I would vote for the 100/2.8 macro. It's very sharp and has 1:1 focus capability. It's also a nice lens for portraits and I even use it for landscape. But this last point is less valid for you I think, since you've already got the 85/1.2 and the 135/2.

And if you won't go with a dedicated macro lens I agree with Steve that a set of extension tubes might be a good solution for you.



Oct 22, 2004 at 11:00 AM
KapHn8d™
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Canon Macro


This question has been covered a lot in the forum... you'll probably get a ton of search hits.

I posted some old 100mm samples here: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/132838

I would highly recommend a 500D while your deciding on a macro lens... they are quite versatile and if your technique is good, you can get amazing results with them on a 70-200 or a 300... I would recommend a 500D over tubes at first.

You may also want to consider other options like the Tamron 90... I hear it is quite nice.









Oct 22, 2004 at 11:28 AM
akclimber
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Canon Macro


If it's just an occasional macro shot in which you're interested, I'd suggest buying a 500D to use with the 300 f/4 or 70-200 f/2.8 you already own. I have a 500D and use it on my 300 f/4 (always with a tripod and IS off) and really like the results. I also own a Sigma 180 f/3.5 EX macro lens which I also enjoy (and with which I also use the 500D). While the dedicated macro lens produces slightly better results, since you alread own the 300 and 70-200, you're quick and inexpensive ticket into the occasional macro world is the 500D which you could still use if you decide in the future to purchase a macro lens. I enjoy owning the 500D and 300 f/4 combo since I'm usually out shooting critters and don't feel like lugging the extra weight of the Sigma macro along with the 300 and 500. I only take the Sigma out and about when I'm sure I'm going to be making macros images, otherwise the 500D, being relatively small and light, just lives in my photo backpack along with all my other every day goodies.

Cheers!



Oct 22, 2004 at 11:41 AM







FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password