| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/16/2005 05:38:49 PM · #1 |
Anyone that has experience with this lens ?
Canon EF 50MM F1,8 II
I want to buy a macro lens, but I don't have lot's of cash to spend. I found this one for a reasonable price (109 euro's)
Any thoughts or ideas ?
Thanks
Message edited by author 2005-11-16 17:39:59.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 05:42:57 PM · #2 |
| This doesn't usually get categorized as a "macro" lens. The 100mm or EF-S 60mm would be better suited lenses, but more expensive. |
|
|
|
11/16/2005 05:45:38 PM · #3 |
There is a 50mm macro (only focuses to 0.5 lifesize unless you get the converter for it). The one you mention is not a macro lens.
//www.canon.ca/english/index-products.asp?lng=en&prodid=211&sgid=7&gid=2&ovr=1
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 05:57:25 PM · #4 |
PM Kirbic (I think), he is a major proponent of reversed-lens macro.
Get a 35mm prime manual focus, a reverse lens adapter, and poof, 3:1 macro for REAL cheap. Get a 100mm macro and another adapter to fit the front threads, and you have autofocus with extreme macro performance.
Message edited by author 2005-11-16 17:59:07.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 07:21:55 PM · #5 |
This isn't a macro lens. It focuses to about 1.5 feet. I just played with it a that distance and a computer mouse just about fills the frame to give you an idea. It is a nice sharp lens though, just not a macro.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 10:47:10 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Get a 35mm prime manual focus, a reverse lens adapter, and poof, 3:1 macro for REAL cheap. Get a 100mm macro and another adapter to fit the front threads, and you have autofocus with extreme macro performance. |
i do this with my tamron 90mm and my nikkor 50mm, which gives 2:1. i'm in the market for a teleconverter and a 24mm to get even closer...
the down side is that you need a ton of light (a small white dwarf should do) and you have to be REALLY close... like touching the lens glass close...
it's fun, though...
some examples :
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 11:14:06 AM · #7 |
great lens, not for macro tho. the 50mm Mark II is pretty much a staple in most peoples lens arsenal.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 11:21:43 AM · #8 |
You must be referring to this lens that is a 50mm macro lens.
I had it. I was tack sharp, but you have to work awful close unless you use extension tubes. I sold mine and got this lens instead. It rocks!
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 11:26:32 AM · #9 |
extension tubes will turn any lens into a macro lens ... and they're cheap
i've taken zillions of macros with the 50 1.8 II
tiny little hoverfly |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 11:39:15 AM · #10 |
what extension tube did you use with your 50 1.8II when you took this photo? I just picked up this lens and love it.
Originally posted by hopper:
extension tubes will turn any lens into a macro lens ... and they're cheap
i've taken zillions of macros with the 50 1.8 II
tiny little hoverfly |
Message edited by author 2005-11-17 11:40:08.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 12:06:52 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by digitalpins:
what extension tube did you use with your 50 1.8II when you took this photo? I just picked up this lens and love it. |
According to his photo info in the caption, he used a 36mm extension tube.
R. |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 01:50:19 PM · #12 |
Ah yes, sorry I meaned the macro lens that is mentioned by people.
The sigma 105mm I've seen, but it cost also double :S
Hmm have to look around then, extention tube seems a good way to deal with it also :)
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:14:26 PM · #13 |
Some info i read was that if you want 1:1 using extension tubes, the amount of extension you need is equal to the lens focal length...i.e., if you want 1:1 with a 50mm macro, you need 50mm of extension tube(s).
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:24:18 PM · #14 |
this is true ... but your working distance with 50mm extension on a 50mm lens will be inside the lens ... meaning you can't focus - you bump into the thing your photographing before you are able to get close enough.
it's a bummer :(
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Some info i read was that if you want 1:1 using extension tubes, the amount of extension you need is equal to the lens focal length...i.e., if you want 1:1 with a 50mm macro, you need 50mm of extension tube(s). |
|
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:26:36 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Some info i read was that if you want 1:1 using extension tubes, the amount of extension you need is equal to the lens focal length...i.e., if you want 1:1 with a 50mm macro, you need 50mm of extension tube(s). |
A true macro lens gives 1:1 without tubes at all. For the other part, I'm not sure. I don't know the relationship between focal length and extensions...
Robt. |
|
|
|
11/17/2005 03:54:01 PM · #16 |
Hmmm..I have not meaasured my tubes, and adapters. I use a 135mm 'regular' lens and the tubes might be 50mm...7, 14, 28 or so all stacked is about 50mm...Hmmm... this is a shot like that. Full frame, but resized for DPC. The rail is .080 inches tall (HO scale car). Seems bigger than 1:1 when viewed, although it can't be that big on the sensor as what you see here might be 1 to 1 1/4" tall. But then using the math i found, i'd need 135mm of tube...not likely to even function like that!
|
|
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: 09/20/2025 01:41:20 PM EDT.
