Canon 100mm Macro / Filters & Lens Hood Questions

05/07/2009 12:24:42 PM · #1

I have been thinking about buying a new lens for a while (photography sure has become an addiction â�� as well as DPC). Since I am very very new to photography, I donâ��t have any particular type of photography I focus on right now, so it has been difficult to decide exactly which lens I want to buy next. But after reading many posts here I think I have finally come to my decision. I think I am going to buy the Canon 100mm Macro. I have read this is a good macro lens and also works well as a general lens or portrait lens. I am very interested in macro and would love to give it a shot, and I love the bokeh the 100mm Macro gives. Since my birthday is coming up, I decided to use this as an excuse to finally buy the lens. My question is, is this a good choice as my next lens? I know this question of â��What lens should I buyâ�� has been asked many times here. But I have almost already made up my mind and I guess I am just looking for reassurance.

Also I had a question about filters. I currently only own a UV filter. I was wondering what filters do you use that you cannot live without? I thought it may be a good idea to get some filters to start playing around with them, but I am not sure where to start. Not just for macros, but for all types of photography (since I am still playing around with all types) â�� what would be â��must haveâ�� filters?

And one last question â�� I feel awfully silly asking this, because it shows how new I am. But could some explain to me the benefits of using a lens hood? From what I understand it can help shield stray light. Is that the main purpose? And what is the difference between the flower shaped hoods and the regular hoods?

I am just itching to get goodies for my camera, and I am trying to decide what I should start with. I am almost sure I am going to go with getting the 100mm Macro, because I have been dieing to play around with it. But I am trying to decide what other goodies I should get either for the macro or for other photography in general.

I appreciate everyoneâ��s help!

rlewis

Canon EOS-40D

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

05/07/2009 12:39:05 PM · #2

The 100 mm macro is a great lens. Get a circular polarizing filter. It is amazing how you can change the color perception/intensity on a flower with the use of the CP.

A lens hood will help knock down flare. It is difficult to use concurrent with the CP....but good technique.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/07/2009 12:47:43 PM · #3

The "flower petal" hoods are typically seen on wider-angle lenses and on zooms with a wider range from fairly wide-angle to short telephoto. The reason is that the optimum hood at the longer end (or at top/bottom of the image) would vignette the image at the wider end (or at left/right sides). Accordingly, the flower petal feature gives less hood extension on the sides of the image that show greater angular reach, if that makes sense?

EVERY "straight" lens hood is a compromise between short-dimension maximum extension vs long-dimension maximum extension, with the short-dimension extension being less-than-optimum so as not to vignette on the long dimension.

This is a fairly garbled explanation but hopefully it is clear enough...

R.

ETA: Incidentally, Canon's EF-S 60mm macro is a heck of a good lens, compares favorably to the 100mm in every respect and gives the same "reach" on a cropped-sensor camera like yours (or mine) as the 100mm does on the FF sensors. It's smaller, lighter, and generally easier to walk around with, and is arguably a better length for portrait shooting on a cropped-sensor camera than is the 100mm: plus, it costs significantly less. The downside is, you can't use it if you ever upgrade to FF, so you'd have to sell it then and get the 100mm. But that 100mm is a HEAVY lens, and I much prefer the 60mm on my 20D.

Message edited by author 2009-05-07 12:50:30.

05/07/2009 04:40:55 PM · #4

rlewis â�� thank you for your suggestion. I have read a little about the circular polarizing filters and I think I may pick one up and give it a try. Since I have never used one, I am sure I will be amazed to see the effect it will make.

Bear_Music â�� Thank you for your explanation about the hoods. That does make sense and has cleared it up for me a lot. I may end up getting a hood â�� but may not make it a priority right now.

Also â�� thank you for your suggestion on the 60mm macro. I have read how it is a very comparable lens, much lighter, and less expensive. But I also heard the 100mm provides better bokeh (do you have any opinion on this?). For only a $100 difference, I thought the 100mm was my best bet. I have not physically held it yet, so I am hoping it wonâ��t be too heavy for me, but I know the lenses I have right now feel way too light, and the few heavier lenses I have tried I actually like the weight better, and I seem to shake less with a heavier lens when I am hand holding it.

Also, right now my local store has a 100mm, but they donâ��t have a 60mm. Their prices seemed too high compared to online stores, so I was considering ordering my lens. But yesterday when I was up there, they priced the 100mm at I think $625. I told them how B&H has it for $490, and they told me they would match their price. So I am glad I can get it for the same price locally.

I think I am going to go down tonight and actually handle the 100mm (since they didnâ��t have it in yesterday) â�� if it feels right then I may be posting later that I am a proud owner of a new 100mm Macro!

05/07/2009 05:17:30 PM · #5

The 100/2.8 Macro *is* a great macro and a fab portrait lens. Instead of getting the admittedly very expensive Canon hood, buy a collapsible rubber hood. Not quite as effective, but on the flip side it can be screwed into the front of the filter, so you can still rotate a polarizer with the hood on. It also can be folded back for those times when you are shooting very close-up, and it takes up next to no room in the bag.
The only filter I'd get right away is a good circular polarizer. Eventually, consider neutral density filters, but to start, get the C-pol.

HeiSch

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

05/07/2009 05:25:37 PM · #6

I have the 100mm and am very happy with it. Very very sharp, a little slow on the focusing side (it's not an L lens), but built very solidly.
I use the hood with it a lot as I don't have a macro ring flash, so I have to iluminate my small objects from the side. This means I am going very close to the object and have to illuminate at a very flat angle to the lens. If I don't use the hood, I noticed too often that I get a glare into the pic from the flashes. A hood elimiates this glare. :)

05/07/2009 05:35:24 PM · #7

Originally posted by kirbic:

Thanks for the advice - it is good to know I can get a hood to go on the filter. I like the idea of it being collapsible. I will see if my local store has one tonight. I am most definetly going to get a circular polarizer.

On Neutral Density filters - what I understand is they limit the light - therefore allowing slower shutter speeds even on bright scenes? Is that correct? I also heard ND Filters are often used to get the Smooth Water effect. Am I in the correct ballpark?

05/07/2009 05:40:31 PM · #8

Originally posted by moriadelacroix:

On Neutral Density filters - what I understand is they limit the light - therefore allowing slower shutter speeds even on bright scenes? Is that correct? I also heard ND Filters are often used to get the Smooth Water effect. Am I in the correct ballpark?

Right on target. Edit to add, there are also "graduated" ND filters that affect part of a scene more than the rest, typically used to tone down bright skies. I personally prefer to bracket exposures and combine in post, but that's just me.

Message edited by author 2009-05-07 17:42:06.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/07/2009 05:49:12 PM · #9

Thank you all so much for the info! I am heading out of the office right now and am going to swing by my local shop. I will post later to let you know what I decided to come home with!

Ecce_Signum

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

05/07/2009 05:49:40 PM · #10

With regard using a CP and lens hood I'm confused as I thought the CP should be used at 90 degrees to the sun/light source to polarize correctly, surely a lens hood would negate this and simply turn it into an ND filter?

Guess I was lucky as I got my hood with the 100mm macro (they are quite expensive).

I used to own a set of Cokin ND filters but had a few pounds to spare and went down the LEE filter route, not cheap but a LEE 150x100mm ND grad doubles up as a full ND filter.

pineapple

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

05/07/2009 05:52:58 PM · #11

For the 100mm Canon macro go to eBay and get a generic hood for it at a fraction of the price of the Canon original. The hoods are almost exactly the same.... Search eBay for the following term and select Cameta auctions as the seller:

ET-67 Lens Hood for Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 F2.8 Macro USM

The Buy It Now price is $19.95.

Ken

05/07/2009 05:57:49 PM · #12

I'm very happy with the 100mm so far, but I'll disagree with Bear about the weight. Compared to a couple of my other lenses it actually seems light. So I guess it's what you're used to.

One other advantage to a hood is that it protects the glass. While I try to protect my lens/camera at all times, sometimes it's nice to have a hood on because it will get banged.

A good circular polarizer is a must-have.

Ken

05/07/2009 05:59:14 PM · #13

Originally posted by pineapple:

Do those have that nice black velvet inside? Although I'm not sure how much of a difference it makes in the real world.

05/07/2009 06:04:49 PM · #14

Originally posted by Ken:

Originally posted by pineapple:
For the 100mm Canon macro go to eBay and get a generic hood for it at a fraction of the price of the Canon original. The hoods are almost exactly the same.... Search eBay for the following term and select Cameta auctions as the seller:

ET-67 Lens Hood for Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 F2.8 Macro USM

The Buy It Now price is $19.95.

Do those have that nice black velvet inside? Although I'm not sure how much of a difference it makes in the real world.

For $10, I doubt it's flocked, but might be painted flat black. The flocking will make some difference, but will it be perceptible? I have doubts, unless the cheap hood is just molded plastic, no flat paint inside. In that case the hood could wind up being worse than no hood at all.
I'll stand by my opinion that a collapsible rubber hood is probably the better choice for this lens, given it's application and the desire to be compatible with a C-pol filter.

pineapple

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

05/07/2009 09:08:41 PM · #15

I bought one a long while back. No it's not got flock. But it is just as good, IMO.

05/08/2009 07:52:56 AM · #16

Thank you everyone for all of your advice!

Sorry I didn't post last night - I stayed up too late playing with my new lens! Yes - I bought the 100mm Macro last night. I also bought a circular polarizer and the rubber collapsible hood

kirbic suggested. I love how it collapses - it will be very handy when taking nature macros - if I need to remove the hood to take a picture of a little critter without scaring it as much - it just collapses right on the lens - quick and easy. Plus - it was only $7.99 and it does fit on the filter, so I still have control over the C-pol filter. I am sure there are some other very good hoods out there, but for the time being I think this one will work just fine for me.

I don't have any new photos to post - last night I didn't really have any good subjects, I was more just playing around with the lens. But I will try to get some photos today and post the results of my new lens!

Again - thank you everyone! I am sure I will have some questions arise as I play around some more.

05/08/2009 11:26:42 AM · #17

Congrats on the new glass! Do give it a try on portraiture, you will be pleased!

Ken

05/08/2009 08:49:45 PM · #18

Isn't the minimum focusing distance about a foot? Unless shooting up against glass I don't see where the would be an advantage. However, for removing the cap and using the filter, it would make life much easier. I might just have to try out that rubber one.

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

05/08/2009 08:53:18 PM · #19

Originally posted by Ken:

Isn't the minimum focusing distance about a foot?

That distance is measured from the sensor plane... so the actual working distance at closest focus is much shorter, about 3 or 4 inches.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/08/2009 08:56:32 PM · #20

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by Ken:
Isn't the minimum focusing distance about a foot?

That distance is measured from the sensor plane... so the actual working distance at closest focus is much shorter, about 3 or 4 inches.

Right. You gotta subtract the length of the lens from... etc etc... minimum working distance 60mm vs 100mm isn't much different (he said plaintively)...

R.

rlewis

Canon EOS-40D

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

05/18/2009 05:46:59 AM · #21

[quote=Ecce Signum] With regard using a CP and lens hood I'm confused as I thought the CP should be used at 90 degrees to the sun/light source to polarize correctly, surely a lens hood would negate this and simply turn it into an ND filter?

To knock down reflections on water and on plant leaves/blooms you do not have to be at a 90 degree angle to the sun. A CP is an absolute must on waterfalls and some glossy plants.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/18/2009 06:56:35 PM · #22

Originally posted by Ecce Signum:

I sent the following PM to Ecce, and he suggested I post it here:

DPChallenge user Bear_Music has sent you the following private message:

"With regard using a CP and lens hood I'm confused as I thought the CP should be used at 90 degrees to the sun/light source to polarize correctly, surely a lens hood would negate this and simply turn it into an ND filter? "

Just saw above...

Lens hood has nothing to do with this; the 90 degrees referred to is the position of the sun relative to where the camera's aimed. If you are aiming at a landscape, say, and the sun is off your right or left shoulder (in other words, at a right angle axis to the lens) then polarization of the sky is at its maximum.

With the sun directly in front of or behind you (parallel to the lens axis) the sky will not polarize at all, or very little.

Angles in between will show progressively more/less polarization of the sky. This is why polarizing filters are problematical with extreme wide angle lenses; my 10mm covers over 100 degrees horizontally, so with a polarizer the sky ranges from optimum polarization to no polarization within a single frame.

Note that we're talking about skies here; the polarizing filter *may* work on reflective surfaces regardless of the sun's position. Also note that the HEIGHT of the sun is a component of the 90-degree angle to a certain extent.

Best, R.

Ecce_Signum

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/18/2009 07:07:36 PM · #23

Robt, its always good to share information and thanks for putting me (and others?) straight with the hood business, its simple when you explain it ;)

vawendy

Sony Alpha a1 II

Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS

05/18/2009 07:11:06 PM · #24

I remember when I first got my cp. I pointed it at a car window that had a reflection, turned the cp, and the reflection disappeared! Then, and even now, the cp feels like my magic filter :)