Dumb Lens Questions - DPChallenge Forums

07/28/2005 01:10:04 AM · #1

I have two:

1. Can the Canon 100mm USM Macro do double duty as a 100mm telephoto (normal shots)?

2. If I buy the 100mm USM Macro with the intention of putting the converter and 50mm lens on the end, do I need the 50mm Macro or will my 50mm F/2.0 work fine?

07/28/2005 01:12:44 AM · #2

1. Definitely

2. Any lens should work fine as long as you have the proper ring to connect the two

07/28/2005 01:12:49 AM · #3

The 100mm macro is an exceptionally nice all-around shooting lens. So is the 60mm macro.

For reversing for extreme closeup, you don't need the 50mm macro; the one you have will work fine. Focus will be at infinity anyway, if I'm not mistaken.

R.

Beagleboy

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

07/28/2005 01:13:36 AM · #4

1. yes

2. you can use any lens to do this. Most people use the 50mm f/1.8 or 50mm f/1.4 because it gives them the largest aperture (largest opening).

kyebosh

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

07/28/2005 01:16:03 AM · #5

not ANY lens can be connect to the front of any lens. But yes the 50mm will work.

07/28/2005 01:17:01 AM · #6

SWEEEEEET!!!

Thank you very much!

07/28/2005 01:18:20 AM · #7

Originally posted by kyebosh:

not ANY lens can be connect to the front of any lens.

Why's that? I was under the impression that anything would work as long as the macro coupler existed.

07/28/2005 01:19:28 AM · #8

OK, NEXT dumb question...

If you had to choose between the following two lenses:

Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 USM ($1399)

or

Canon 17-40mm f/4.0 USM ($679)

I understand the spec differences, but I don't understand if the extra $600 will make a big impact on day-to-day shooting. Yes? No?

07/28/2005 01:20:48 AM · #9

Originally posted by aboutimage:

Is this the 17-40L? I would certainly go with that, if that's the case.

kyebosh

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

07/28/2005 01:21:13 AM · #10

The cheaper one is an excellent lens. If you really need the extra stop, then well there's your answer (or the 17-35L 2.8 used).

07/28/2005 01:21:43 AM · #11

I think so....

//www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00009R6WO/dpchallenge-20/102-4392403-3836923

??

What does the L mean?

07/28/2005 01:21:47 AM · #12

Originally posted by brianlh:

Originally posted by kyebosh:
not ANY lens can be connect to the front of any lens.

Why's that? I was under the impression that anything would work as long as the macro coupler existed.

The optical comnstruction of some modern lenses does not work well for imaging in reverse. This would be especially true of lenses with floating elements I believe.

R.

07/28/2005 01:24:40 AM · #13

Ahh I see- thanks for pointing that out to me Logan, and for clearing it up Robert.

David - the L stands for 'Luxury', which Canon labels all of their 'best' lenses. The 17-40 f/4L is certainly a wonderful lens, from all that I've heard. If I could afford it, it would definitely be in my lineup of lenses.

Message edited by author 2005-07-28 01:25:09.

07/28/2005 01:28:51 AM · #14

Originally posted by aboutimage:

Here's a good, straightforward review of the twolenses side-by-side with sample shots: //www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml

Bottom line; you'll be happy with the 17-40, no need to "waste" the money on the other unless you really, really need the extra speed and the money is not an issue.

Robt.

07/28/2005 01:35:26 AM · #15

Money is always an issue, Robt. Thank you very much for the review. I'm having a hard time deciding what to buy... I'm torn between the following 2 purchases:

17-40mm f/4.0L USM and 70-200 f/4L USM
or
17-40mm f/4.0L USM and 100mm f/2.8 Macro (and coupler)

See, I already have the 50mm f/2.0 II and am going on an extended road trip. I am trying to balance money with desire. I KNOW I'll want wide angle, so that's a done deal. But to choose between macro and telephoto for a road trip... so difficult.

ed: I only have enough money for 2 of the 3.

Message edited by author 2005-07-28 01:36:09.

07/28/2005 01:47:30 AM · #16

My experience of the 70-200 f/4.0 is that it's a wonderful lens but it's a bear to hand-hold. You're gonna have to use higher ISOs and wider apertures to do it. Not a problem for me as I almost always use a tripod. Maybe a problem for you when travelling. The 100mm is a decent-enough reach on a 1.6 crop camera, the eqyuivalent of 160mm on a 35mm camera.

Speaking for myself, if I could only have one, I'd go with the macro. But I'm a macro kind of guy. I ended up with the 60mm macro and don't regret it at all. Since you have the 50mm already, the 100mm seems a good choice for your macro.

My gut feeling, based on your portfolio, is go with the macro and make the 70-200 range your next purchase.

R.

kyebosh

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

07/28/2005 01:50:16 AM · #17

Depends on the user, but I find the 80-200L fine to handhold, even in lowlight, and panning. It's twice as heavy as the 70-200L.

07/28/2005 01:55:39 AM · #18

Once again, I defer to the wisdom of the group. Wide angle and Macro it will be. I'll get the telephoto after my next design job ;-)

Now, can anyone direct me to a URL that has the exact coupler I need for the 100/50 macro setup? I looked at B&H but the answer didn't quite jump out at me.

07/28/2005 01:57:50 AM · #19

Originally posted by kyebosh:

Depends on the user, but I find the 80-200L fine to handhold, even in lowlight, and panning. It's twice as heavy as the 70-200L.

Oh, it's DOABLE but you have to pay attention to what you're doing... The mechanics of shooting become critical if you want maximum acuity in your shots, which is very important to me. But that's just my personal bias, and I'm anyway an old-school, large-format guy so the use of a tripod is second-nature to me.

Robt.

07/28/2005 02:10:27 AM · #20

Originally posted by aboutimage:

I won't point you at the exact one, but I'll tell you how to find it. Find a coupler that has threads on one side that match the thread size on the 100mm and threads on the other that match the 50mm. If your 100mm has 58mm threads and the 50mm has 52mm (which I know to be true - assuming you indeed have the 1.8 listed in your profile and not a 2.0 (which I haven't heard of - but there are a lot of lenses I haven't heard of)), then you'll want a 58mm/52mm macro coupler.

ADGibson

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

07/28/2005 02:22:01 AM · #21

Where do you find the couplers for connecting the lenses?

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

07/28/2005 02:22:37 AM · #22

Originally posted by brianlh:

David - the L stands for 'Luxury', which Canon labels all of their 'best' lenses.

NO NO NO!! L stands for LOADED, which is what you'd better be if you start plunking down cash for these.