| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/02/2005 11:40:31 AM · #1 |
| This might be stupid question, but with the 100mm Macro can you still get very close with the lense to the subject or do you need to be at a distance? |
|
|
|
08/02/2005 11:42:42 AM · #2 |
Every lens has a minimum focusing distance. As far as what that is for this lens you'd probably find that in a lens review or the lens manual.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2005 11:49:01 AM · #3 |
On the f/2.8 version the minimum focusing distance is 5.9" - which is quite close enough for a 100mm macro :-)
If you would like to see some sample macros with that lens, let me know. I absolutely love mine!!
Edit: Link to lens on BH Photo
Message edited by author 2005-08-02 11:49:40. |
|
|
|
08/02/2005 11:49:43 AM · #4 |
You will need to be at bit of a distance rather than right on top of the subject.
One of the nice things about the 100 mm macro lens is that you DON'T (and in fact you can't) have to get that close to your subject to get a good macro photo. The idea is that the distance allows you to avoid disturbing the subject of your photography. That nervous bug can come in sharp and large without you being right on top of it.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2005 12:07:36 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by djcoffey:
You will need to be at bit of a distance rather than right on top of the subject.
One of the nice things about the 100 mm macro lens is that you DON'T (and in fact you can't) have to get that close to your subject to get a good macro photo. The idea is that the distance allows you to avoid disturbing the subject of your photography. That nervous bug can come in sharp and large without you being right on top of it. |
I guess this would depend on your definition of macro and close. To get what I would consider a macro shot (1:1) with the 100mm f2.8 you would have to be the 5.9 inches away tfaust said. Any further away and it wouldn't be a macro shot. Seems pretty close to me but then I've not used shorter lenses or flipped lenses that require closer working distances. |
|
|
|
08/02/2005 12:13:08 PM · #6 |
Also remember that the minimum focusing distance specification is normally measured from the sensor to the subject, not from the front of the lens. When measured from the front element of the lens, it is referred to as the "working distance." The working distance at minimum focus on the 100/2.8 Macro USM is about 3.5 inches (estimate, I just did this test for someone else a few days ago and just eyeballed it, not actually measured).
|
|
|
|
08/02/2005 12:19:12 PM · #7 |
| From the front of the lens to subject I can't focus any closer than 5.9" with the 100mm f2.8. |
|
|
|
08/02/2005 12:25:37 PM · #8 |
If you're dying to get close (for whatever reason? a macro is a macro, generally speaking), maybe you should look into the 60mm macro that Robert (bear_music) has been raving about.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2005 12:32:28 PM · #9 |
Speaking in terms of specifications:
100mm macro: 12" minimum focus distance (1:1) — distance of body to lens mount (1.75") — length of lens (4.7") = 5.65" working distance front-of-lens to subject.
60mm macro has a 7.8" minimum focus distance but a 2 inch sorter lens = roughly 3.3" working distance.
These numbers don't include the lens hood.
The 60mm has significantly more DOF at 1:1 and a given f/stop than the 100mm does. That's your tradeoff.
My gut feeling is, if you're looking for a lot of true macro (1:1) it's probably better to go longer; event he 180mm might be a better choice yet. If you're doing more "close-up" work, the 60mm is more versatile I think.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2005 03:12:00 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
I guess this would depend on your definition of macro and close. To get what I would consider a macro shot (1:1) with the 100mm f2.8 you would have to be the 5.9 inches away tfaust said. Any further away and it wouldn't be a macro shot. Seems pretty close to me but then I've not used shorter lenses or flipped lenses that require closer working distances. |
I was observing a woman on a recent trip who (on the advice of her local photo shop) had assembled a macro setup based on a 50mm lens and an extension tube. She called the setup a "macro" setup, but basically had to be within an inch or so of her subject in order to capture the image. I was contrasting that with my experience with the 100 mm macro.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2005 03:18:30 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by djcoffey:
She called the setup a "macro" setup, but basically had to be within an inch or so of her subject in order to capture the image. |
That is a legitimate technique. With the 50mm the working distance is pretty small, but bear in mind this isn't always an issue. With an 85mm fixed lens the working distance is pretty good.
|
|
