Macro with the 100-400L IS USM - DPChallenge Forums

12/23/2005 05:43:46 PM · #1

I got hold of a (fairly overpriced) bunch of Kenko extension tubes recently, the ones with the full electronic connections. So i've been playing around with my 100-400L as a macro lens.

I've found at 400mm, with all 68mm of tubes attached, the closest focusing distance is still several feet. Magnification is pretty impressive, nowhere near 1:1 though. But pulling the zoom in to 100mm reduces the focusing distance lots, to just beyond the end of the lens hood, and gives more magnification. Still not 1:1 macro, but fairly impressive results:

To give a sense of scale, the corners of that frame are about 45mm apart. I'd photograph a ruler, but i can't for the life of me find one. And a 100% crop:

Ooh, my pixels are wobbly!

So, not quite a true macro, but the extension tubes are a lot cheaper than a 100mm canon macro lens! I'd also be quite interested to see the results if anyone else has tried extension tubes with other long telephoto lenses, or any lens not usually used for macro. Macro fisheye anyone?

12/23/2005 10:00:52 PM · #2

Woot, i did some very silly fiddling around with a 2x teleconverter in the mix, and eventually found a way to get 1:1... the tubes between the teleconverter and the lens. You lose a bit of optical quality but the extra magnification makes it more than worth it. Here's the keypad of my nokia 8210, those things are tiny you know :)

And here's a 100% crop, not as sharp as the above but i was stupidly using a high iso which doesn't help the quality here:

Still, pretty impressive for a sports/wildlife lens, huh?

12/23/2005 10:04:44 PM · #3

Have you tried a 50mm with a reverse lens adapter?

12/23/2005 10:15:09 PM · #4

Originally posted by wavelength:

Have you tried a 50mm with a reverse lens adapter?

Yes, but it doesn't let me get 1:1 macro from 5 feet away :)

12/23/2005 10:17:13 PM · #5

oh, right then. I'll be on my merry way :O)

Prof_Fate

12/23/2005 11:36:01 PM · #6

I have played a bit with macro and my rebel - not 1:1 yet, but after meeting a local photographer i may have to go wpend the bux on a 100 2.8 lens...
some of his shots (Emmanuel P's website)

i know he has used extention tubes and stuff with his 500 4.5L. He showd me some shots..not that i know which one that is now...
maybe this one...

With a reversed 50 1.8, what magnification do you get?

Message edited by author 2005-12-23 23:38:05.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

12/23/2005 11:40:48 PM · #7

50 reversed on the body gives you 1:1, reversed on a 100mm lens is about 2:1.

NstiG8tr

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

12/23/2005 11:53:17 PM · #8

Here's what my cheap TV looks like with the kits lens and a reversed 50mm 1.8

IceRock

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/23/2005 11:54:15 PM · #9

Mast be grate "

12/23/2005 11:57:33 PM · #10

Originally posted by kyebosh:

50 reversed on the body gives you 1:1, reversed on a 100mm lens is about 2:1.

Does this mean that switching for a 24mm prime would give you 2.5 or 3:1 ????

Message edited by author 2005-12-23 23:57:48.

12/24/2005 12:06:23 AM · #11

a 24mm reversed on body is about 2:1, on a 100mm macro it's about 4:1

12/24/2005 12:08:53 AM · #12

Originally posted by kyebosh:

a 24mm reversed on body is about 2:1, on a 100mm macro it's about 4:1

GOOD LORD!!

:O)

12/24/2005 09:07:31 PM · #13

Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by kyebosh:
a 24mm reversed on body is about 2:1, on a 100mm macro it's about 4:1

GOOD LORD!!

:O)

Well, today i tried that, so here's an update. The business end of my 100-400 is 77mm, and handily i have a 24mm sigma "macro" (but not really) lens that's also a 77m filter. I had to hold it against the lens by hand, not having a suitably sized reversing ring (do they even exist?), so had to shoot at high iso and widest aperture to compensate for camera shake. Same subject as above, the results are a bit poor:

Best magnification so far though, that button is about 3mm from top to bottom so looks like about 1:5 or 1:6 magnification, pretty impressive. The depth of field is ludicrously shallow though, and there's a bit of a vignette. Stopping down to f/16 just accentuates the vignette and yields no noticeable improvement:

12/24/2005 09:42:40 PM · #14

Yeah, dumping the DOF to zilch doesnt really help now does it? Maybe stick with a 50mm then, eh?

I wonder, did you stop down the 24mm also? just a thought.

12/24/2005 09:47:21 PM · #15

you know any lenses will work, but you will get severe vignetting with some. Even zooms work pretty well. If you shot it with the 50mm infront of the 400 you might get better results than with the 24 on front of the macro lens. Oh and Neither lens has to be macro to use this method.

12/24/2005 10:04:40 PM · #16

Originally posted by wavelength:

Yeah, dumping the DOF to zilch doesnt really help now does it? Maybe stick with a 50mm then, eh?

I wonder, did you stop down the 24mm also? just a thought.

Thing is, the 50mm is considerably smaller than the 77mm filter size, and vignetting will be at least as bad (when used with the big telephoto anyway). I had no way to stop down the 24mm, it being an eos lens. Do you think that would help?

Originally posted by kyebosh:

If you shot it with the 50mm infront of the 400 you might get better results than with the 24 on front of the macro lens. Oh and Neither lens has to be macro to use this method.

I was using the 24 on the front of the 100-400... i'm just trying different things with that one (very non-macro lens) to see if i can get something dramatic out of it based on its high magnification and good quality, using different accessories that people wouldn't normally use on such a lens.

So anyone got any other examples of using non-macro lenses for macro in interesting and unusual ways?

Message edited by author 2005-12-24 22:09:18.

12/24/2005 10:07:34 PM · #17

Originally posted by riot:

Originally posted by wavelength:
Yeah, dumping the DOF to zilch doesnt really help now does it? Maybe stick with a 50mm then, eh?

I wonder, did you stop down the 24mm also? just a thought.

Thing is, the 50mm is considerably smaller than the 77mm filter size, and vignetting will be at least as bad (when used with the big telephoto anyway). I had no way to stop down the 24mm, it being an eos lens. Do you think that would help?

dunno, couldn't hurt! :D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/24/2005 10:11:27 PM · #18

as i said before, some macro shooters are finding old fully manual lenses, and mounting them reversed direcly onto the body. I've seen great results with a lot less glass between you and your subject.

donniev

Canon EOS-50D

12/24/2005 10:21:59 PM · #19

What is people's source for a reversing ring.

12/24/2005 10:23:24 PM · #20

Originally posted by donniev:

What is people's source for a reversing ring.

I once found a site that had about every male to male adapter out there, been looking for it on and off all evening. I can try again.

12/24/2005 10:36:21 PM · #21

search for a macro coupler on b and h

12/24/2005 10:51:02 PM · #22

Originally posted by kyebosh:

search for a macro coupler on b and h

they don't have them, I've checked. not in all sizes anyways, they do have a few.