| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/08/2003 12:21:10 AM · #1 |
I am hopefully going to get a macro lebs in the next few weeks (e-bay permitting).
I would have to probably buy a lens hood, if I wanted on, new. I have noticed that these in some cases are expensive (the canon one is about $40 I think - seems a lot for a piece of plastic.
As I will be getting the lens primarily for macro work .....
Is it worth getting a lens hood or is it something I can live without easily enough?
|
|
|
|
11/08/2003 10:19:13 AM · #2 |
I think getting the lens hood is a good idea; I use the hood on my Canon 100/2.8 macro not only for protection (I don't use a UV filter) but also to avoid flare.
I believe you will find that you will use the lens for much more than macro work; once you work with a really sharp prime, you will be addicted.
The Canon hood is expensive. It is, however, a very nice hood, stiff, light, but rugged with a flocked inside surface. The Canon hood is bayonet mount (fast, easy) and can be installed reversed for storage. So there is some justification for the high price, but I think $40 is still high. Obviously not TOO high, I paid it anyway, LOL
|
|
|
|
11/08/2003 07:39:16 PM · #3 |
Thanks for the heads up Kirbic.
Out of interest, as I am new to macro, how often do you find yourself using that lens for non macro work. I've heard some people use them for a lot of shot styles.
What shots would you typically use it for?
|
|
|
|
11/09/2003 07:19:18 AM · #4 |
Its quite good for fairly tight portraits:
//www.pbase.com/gordonmcgregor/amanda
All shot with a Canon F2.8 100mm macro and she isn't very small... |
|
|
|
11/09/2003 11:27:05 AM · #5 |
Hoo, sorry Natator for the late response to your question. I too use it for tight portraits, but since we're really talking about a 160mm equivalent FoV on the 10D, it is really a good moderate telephoto; I've even had good success putting a 1.4x teleconverter between it and the camera, bringing me to 224mm @ f/4. I do avoid this when I can, but the combination is still superior to my Canon 28-200mm f3.5-5.6 alone in speed, contrast and sharpness.
Unfortunately, Canon's 1.4x II and 2.0x II converters do not work with this lens, because the projecting front element of the converter interferes with the ring around the rear element of the macro lens. BUT, I do use the 2.0x II with a 12mm extension tube and the 100mm macro for Uber-macro work. Gets me above 2.0x total magnification, but of course you lose infinity focus.
|
|
|
|
11/09/2003 04:26:07 PM · #6 |
Thanks for the extra info there guys, I think I will fork out on the hood.
Some GREAT portraits there Gordon, nicely taken and a lovely model.
|
|
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: 09/09/2025 10:59:18 AM EDT.
