Anden wrote:
I think it is hard to say this macro lens is the best since there is a variety of objects that people shoot with macro lenses and the magnification is an important issue.
For flowers I prefer either the 85L with tubes for the great bokeh and subtle colortransitions:
Amazing photos and such nice colours. Did you shoot those flowers with a 85L lens and what tubes?
Well, while it is true that it is the photographer that makes a difference and not the lens especially when it comes to macro pictures I must admit I burn with envy with the guys who uses MP-E65. I have been using Nikon equipment for close to 10 years now but I will shell out the money for a canon body, a flash setup and a MP-E65 as soon as I can justify it. The photographers who uses that lens produces pictures of such quality, I essentially turn green with jealousy and pray that I can be half as good sometime in the near future. The high magnification ratio of that lens makes everything so difficult you have to be really really good to get high quality results and when you can make sharp, properly exposed pictures at 5X I am guessing 1X and lower must be child's play. Out of curiosity though for you lucky guys What is your keeper to discard ratio?
no offense to the op but Dalantech's macro shots are superior in every way (lighting, composition, and image quality). How much of that can be attributed to skill vs lens I don't know but the mpe is looking like the "best lens" for insect macro in this thread. All of the shots I happen to like the most and gravitate towards in this forum section all come from the MPE as well. Also the 2 best macro photographers in this forum (lordV and dal) both use the MPE. It could be coincidence but I'm going with MPE as best choice for macro once you know what you are doing. (specificially insects)
As was said already I think the optical quality of the major brands and many third party macros are all of very high quality. So to determine the "best" will depend on the application.
For me it goes like this;
In the quality lab: I like to use the Tamron 90 f/2.8. Good working distance (not too little or too much), light weight.
Flowers / natural light: Sigma 150 f/2.8. Great working distance, tri-pod collar. Doesn't extend when focusing.
All around: Canon Ef-s 60. Light yet solid feeling. Doesn't extend when focusing. Surprisingly good optics....best bang-for-the-buck. Magnification increases quickly with tubes. Close focus distance makes it ideal for using diffused flash light.
MP-E65: best for high magnificaion. Much more convenient than carrying around tubes and swapping them out. Optics are hard to beat.
Mike Scott wrote:
All around: Canon Ef-s 60. Light yet solid feeling. Doesn't extend when focusing. Surprisingly good optics....best bang-for-the-buck. Magnification increases quickly with tubes. Close focus distance makes it ideal for using diffused flash light.
Mike
Glad you brought up the 60 macro. It is a great all rounder as you say. Most people tend to go for the 100. I have had both and do prefer the 60. Smoother bokeh, smaller, lighter, cheaper.
Emre Dikici wrote:
Out of curiosity though for you lucky guys What is your keeper to discard ratio?
It really depends on the conditions. If I'm baiting a wasp with honey that I've placed on a tree branch then the only issue is just getting close enough to take the shot. I can rest the lens on the branch and use it as a poor man's focusing rail. I'll still take several frames and discard the rest but I'm not deleting out of focus images. If there is a lot of wind or subject movement then I'd say that my current ratio is one in three -but it was one in ten or more when I first started shooting with the MPE...
packrobottom wrote:
It could be coincidence but I'm going with MPE as best choice for macro once you know what you are doing. (specificially insects)
cheers
I initially went with the MPE-65mm out of convenience: It's a PITA to be out in the field and to have to swap tubes in and out when I see something that I want to shoot but the lens isn't at the right magnification for the composition that I want. Then I met the snake and it convinced me to get an MPE...
I was out shooting in one of my favorite spots when I almost stepped on a large black snake. I don't know who jumped first, me or the serpent, but when I landed I accidentally hit one of the many lens release buttons on the tubes and my 100mm macro bungy jumped into the weeds -the cord on the MR-14EX slowed the fall so the glass didn't break, but the incident convinced me that it was time to start saving up for the MPE-65.
@ Mike: Excellent post! I too prefer the EF-S 60mm over the 100mm -better color and contrast with the 60.
@ Larry: That is one of the big disadvantages to shooting with the MPE-65 -no infinity focus. But when I'm shooting macro it's usually in the heat of the day in lighting conditions that don't work for wild life and scenic photography so I don't miss the reach of a standard macro lens.
@ packrobottom: That shot would be very tough with any other lens. I could get that mag (3x) with a 100mm + tubes + a 1.4TC but the quality of the final image wouldn't even be close to the MPE-65 -a noticeable difference in color, contrast, and sharpness that you'd be able to see even in a resized photo...
Dalantech wrote:
I'll still take several frames and discard the rest but I'm not deleting out of focus images.
Emre Dikici wrote:
Can you expand on this a little bit? Why wouldn't delete the out of focus images. In my workflow they usually are first to go into the trash.
Sorry -my poor red neck English again. I'm not deleting out of focus images because I'm not taking them -if I delete a shot it's because of minor differences in composition between it and the one I want to keep. I refocus for every shot and on a tricky scene I might shift where I place the area of acceptable focus a little and then choose which shot I like best before I post process the "keepers".
