A few more questions…
- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated Nov 6, 2007 at 2:28 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
Yea I’m learning just enough to be dangerous.
Last weekI purchased a 50mm MACRO F2.8 1:1 for my Sony. I really wanted the 100mm so I could get Macro from further away but the price was double for the 100mm and the quality was supposed to be very close to the same. I was unaware of the film to digital conversion when I bought this so a 50mm is actually going to be a 70 something MM lens I think. This is a positive trade off,, right? I know you get screwed for a wide angle but it seems to work in your favor for a zoom or a macro. Am I missing something?
Also I’m thinking about getting a 2x tele converter and turning my 70-210 Beercan into a long lens. What do you guys think about doing that. Do you loose much quality?
Mike,
It seems to me that if you preferred the longer local length on your macro, you are benefiting from the digital crop.
With regard to the 2x teleconverter, what is the max aperture on your 70-210? You lose two stops of light with the 2x and you might lose autofocus if its not a fast lens to begin with. If the max aperture of your 210 is 5.6, you will end up with a 420mm f11. Not very usable.
Its a constant f4 so that’d make it an f8. It does have a tendency to search in low light so maybe 1.5x or none?
50mm or 100mm macro?
Again, It’s all depends on the situations. I have used them both and tend to use them in different subjects. The longer one give you more working distance for sure. You won’t need get too close to your subject to get the 1:1 ratio. For butterfly and some sensitive insect shot I
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.