| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/28/2007 04:11:28 PM · #1 |
I just got a Canon 70-300 IS USM lens. This is the first telephoto zoom lens in this range that I'm using.
Is there any way to reduce the minimum focussing distance of this lens (it has a min focus distance of 1.5 m), like for instance any extenders/prime lenses that I can attach to this lens? |
|
|
|
09/28/2007 04:14:01 PM · #2 |
The only thing I'm aware of that you can add to this to reduce the min. focusing distance is an extension tube. Can be bought in many different sizes depending on how you want to take care of it.
MattO
|
|
|
|
09/28/2007 04:15:07 PM · #3 |
| Thanks MattO, looking up extension tubes.... |
|
|
|
09/28/2007 04:21:04 PM · #4 |
You could also use a "macro filter" that screws onto the front of the lens. I'd recommend against it because unless you spend a lot, they are often of dubious optical quality.
Since the extension tubes have no glass, their effects on image quality are less. |
|
|
|
09/28/2007 05:01:56 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
You could also use a "macro filter" that screws onto the front of the lens. I'd recommend against it because unless you spend a lot, they are often of dubious optical quality.
Since the extension tubes have no glass, their effects on image quality are less. |
^agreed. I have the "macro filters" or "close-up lenses" as they're sometimes called, and though I've never done a comparison, I'm sure they affect IQ and probably exposure values. They are fun to play around with, though -- I can get within 2 inches of something with my 18-70 kit lens. |
|
|
|
09/28/2007 05:23:27 PM · #6 |
Some time ago I compared a Sigma 70-300 (which has macro capability, but probably would be representative of any 70-300 with extension tubes), a set of closeup lenses ("filters") on a 50mm F/1.8 (very sharp prime), and a 105mm Nikkor macro lens. Without close inspection, the IQ was in the same order, with the 70-300 being fairly poor. The 50mm + closeup when stopped down to F/16 was almost as good as the macro lens, but there was no contest at wider apertures.
I strongly recommend saving up for a good macro lens rather than fussing around with the alternatives unless you expect very infrequent use, in which case a good two element closeup lens (mine were single element) might suffice.
|
|
|
|
09/28/2007 05:25:58 PM · #7 |
Here's the setup I used for my not-very-good fill the frame entry:
[thumb]577438[/thumb]
|
|
|
|
09/28/2007 05:47:29 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by talmy:
Some time ago I compared a Sigma 70-300 (which has macro capability, but probably would be representative of any 70-300 with extension tubes), a set of closeup lenses ("filters") on a 50mm F/1.8 (very sharp prime), and a 105mm Nikkor macro lens. Without close inspection, the IQ was in the same order, with the 70-300 being fairly poor. The 50mm + closeup when stopped down to F/16 was almost as good as the macro lens, but there was no contest at wider apertures.
I strongly recommend saving up for a good macro lens rather than fussing around with the alternatives unless you expect very infrequent use, in which case a good two element closeup lens (mine were single element) might suffice. |
Yes I guess a good macro is the way I'll go eventually. Thanks talmy for the detailed info |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/18/2025 01:26:04 AM EDT.
