| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/01/2007 12:15:59 PM · #26 |
I have the Sigma 150 macro for my 20D. The lens is not too big for me, and it's nice to have the extra working distance when approaching insects.
check out this site for shots with the MP-E 65. Hand-held and using a homemade light rig (no fancy ring lights needed).Bug Macros On that Flickr site, he has tutuorials on how to build his lighting rig (made with a couple Coke cans). |
|
|
|
10/01/2007 12:17:22 PM · #27 |
What about the Tamron 90 Macro. it has just as good of reviews as the canons. BTW-- FM got the picture of the lens wrong in the reviews..
Tamron 90 |
|
|
|
10/01/2007 12:18:48 PM · #28 |
I use the 180mm on the 5D which would be a rough equivalent, I guess. I'm actually not quite sure now what happens on a crop sensor. Do you actually get greater than 1:1 magnification or does the working distance go up? I don't think it's working distance.
Anyway, I absolutely love my lens. Handheld is somewhat of a challenge and I prefer to use a tripod, so you may need to do that (which is typical of macro anyway). |
|
|
|
10/01/2007 01:15:41 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I use the 180mm on the 5D which would be a rough equivalent, I guess. I'm actually not quite sure now what happens on a crop sensor. Do you actually get greater than 1:1 magnification or does the working distance go up? I don't think it's working distance. |
Magnification is independent of sensor size; all that changes is the field of view, which is wider for a given lens on FF sensors. 1:1 reproduction just means that your subject and whatever portion of it is captured by the sensor can be mapped 1:1; if you laid a dime ON the sensor it would be the exact same size as the dime as captured by the sensor at 1:1.
Working distance also stays the same regardless of sensor, because that's a measurement from subject to sensor/film plane, and that does not vary.
R.
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 01:43:16 PM · #30 |
Holy Macro - those are some setups! I will have to keep this on the inexpensive side since I have decided to go back to L glass for telephoto (oh my aching arms!)
Have taken a small detour over to the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM APO HSM IF Macro. Seems to be a great lens according to those on the Canon boards.
Message edited by author 2007-10-01 13:45:46.
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 02:06:23 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I use the 180mm on the 5D which would be a rough equivalent, I guess. I'm actually not quite sure now what happens on a crop sensor. Do you actually get greater than 1:1 magnification or does the working distance go up? I don't think it's working distance. |
A crop sensor is just the same as taking the full frame picture and cropping the middle out of it. So when it comes to macro photography 1:1 is still 1:1 with the same working distance - but of course with the physical sensor being smaller a 1:1 image will cover less area and thus have a greater apparent magnification, so you would get a bit more detail (this stands to reason since the crop sensors have smaller pixels which you are projecting a 1:1 image onto).
So if you were to put your 180mm on a crop sensor camera, you could set up the shot in exactly the same way and an image absolutely identical to the middle part of the image you get from the 5D (except maybe with a few more pixels), or you could step back and get an image with similar composition at a greater working distance - although obviously with different perspective and DoF.
On the other hand, if you had a crop sensor camera with a hypothetical 112.5mm macro lens, you could compose from the same spot as the 5D/180mm and get the same perspective - but again you would have a lower magnification and hence more DoF.
As for the question of focal length vs. DoF for a fixed magnification, it seems I was wrong on this one, my bad. There's an interesting article about it here.
Originally posted by "DrAchoo":
Anyway, I absolutely love my lens. Handheld is somewhat of a challenge and I prefer to use a tripod, so you may need to do that (which is typical of macro anyway). |
Indeed. The 60mm gains a little here because it's smaller and easier to handhold - but it's still pretty hard to compose macro shots handheld...
splidge
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 02:06:56 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by splidge:
It's worth noting that the 60mm has greater depth of field at a given magnification and f/stop by virtue of its shorter focal length - and depending on what you're doing depth of field is often at a premium in macro photography, and if you stop down too much you run into diffraction effects.
On the other hand, I have the 60mm and I'm quite happy with it but wouldn't mind a bit more working range at times. They are both excellent lenses. |
As others have pointed out, there's no difference in DOF between different lenses at the same magnification.
But here's something else: the working distance is defined as the distance from the sensor plane to the subject. The 100mm Canon macro lens is quite a but longer, physically, than the 60mm macro EFS lens, so a lot of that "extra" distance is eaten up by the lens itself; there's very little difference as measured from the front of the lens to the subject, which is the real workign distance in practical terms.
R.
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 02:15:13 PM · #33 |
That I understand (finally) - thanks!
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by splidge:
It's worth noting that the 60mm has greater depth of field at a given magnification and f/stop by virtue of its shorter focal length - and depending on what you're doing depth of field is often at a premium in macro photography, and if you stop down too much you run into diffraction effects.
On the other hand, I have the 60mm and I'm quite happy with it but wouldn't mind a bit more working range at times. They are both excellent lenses. |
As others have pointed out, there's no difference in DOF between different lenses at the same magnification.
But here's something else: the working distance is defined as the distance from the sensor plane to the subject. The 100mm Canon macro lens is quite a but longer, physically, than the 60mm macro EFS lens, so a lot of that "extra" distance is eaten up by the lens itself; there's very little difference as measured from the front of the lens to the subject, which is the real workign distance in practical terms.
R. |
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 02:17:12 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
But here's something else: the working distance is defined as the distance from the sensor plane to the subject. The 100mm Canon macro lens is quite a but longer, physically, than the 60mm macro EFS lens, so a lot of that "extra" distance is eaten up by the lens itself; there's very little difference as measured from the front of the lens to the subject, which is the real workign distance in practical terms.
R. |
Thanks for the reminder ... I keep forgetting about that!
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 07:22:21 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
But here's something else: the working distance is defined as the distance from the sensor plane to the subject. The 100mm Canon macro lens is quite a but longer, physically, than the 60mm macro EFS lens, so a lot of that "extra" distance is eaten up by the lens itself; there's very little difference as measured from the front of the lens to the subject, which is the real workign distance in practical terms. |
Well, I guess it depends whether the bug is more scared of you or the lens :). The extra length of the lens barrel is still extra range for the rest of your body - and I can't help thinking that in some situations it probably allows you to get the shot with less contortion involved (although I also imagine the 40D's live view helps a lot in that respect).
I don't know about US prices but here in the UK the 100mm costs a good 1.5x as much as the 60mm which is certainly swung me towards the 60mm (they had a nearly new one in the shop the day I walked in which contributed a bit as well!). The Sigma 150mm is actually more expensive than either of them (although way cheaper than the 180mm L).
splidge
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 07:39:49 PM · #36 |
| May I add the Canon 100mm 2.8 also makes a BEAUTIFUL portrait lens - SMILE! |
|
|
|
10/01/2007 08:38:53 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by iamwoman:
May I add the Canon 100mm 2.8 also makes a BEAUTIFUL portrait lens - SMILE! |
Oh, that it does!
I used it quite a bit on a 10D, and loved the focal length, both for macro work and otherwise. The fact that it is a non-extending design with a non-rotating front element is another big plus. I don't think any of the third-party designs are.
FWIW, you don't need expensive macro flash. Just get a bounce card (like Lumiquest) and an off-camera cable. You can attach the flash to a bracket and get soft, off-axis light, or handhold the flash (though that gets fun when also handholding the camera!). This shot:
was done holding the camera in one hand and the flash in the other. The frog was 6.5 feet up on a patio door. I got off two shots before he jumped... and landed on my forehead! the flash was up and to the left, with the bounce card about 6 inches above the frog.
Message edited by author 2007-10-01 20:39:58.
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 08:48:12 PM · #38 |
Where did the flash and camera go after he landed on your forehead?
|
|
|
|
10/01/2007 08:55:38 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Where did the flash and camera go after he landed on your forehead? |
LOL, the flash wound up suspended from the off-camera cord, while I picked him off... after I stopped laughing!
|
|
|
|
10/02/2007 11:10:52 AM · #40 |
Well I have heard that the insurance check is going out and while they depreciated my one-year-old equipment, they said if I ended up paying more for replacements to send them the bills. I guess that means I am going back to the Canon 100mm.
The only thing I want to get that I did not have before is a lighting system - what do you recommend for ringlights / systems? I do have the 580 EX, but I have never used it! (don't know how either)
|
|
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: 08/02/2025 05:53:47 PM EDT.
