Getting the big picture with macro lenses
- This topic has 52 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated Oct 27, 2008 at 5:20 am by
.
-
Posts
-
Great stuff Morsie, the backlit barra tail is monster !
Here’s 3 older shots from the 100 macro – it’s a an awesome lens IMO.
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
BTW, that long lens stuff is inspirational Will – I think I’m going to ‘borrow’ that style.. 😉 ;D
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
wow I need to stop fishing alone and start bringing my camera on the river.
Morsie, the abel reel in the background is a nice touch.
http://society6.com/grainfarmer Fly Fishing and Landscape open edition Photography prints.
http://grainfarmer.vsco.co/ iPhone photos
http://instagram.com/chad_simcox InstagramCoral trout? Never heard of them. So this…
has this at the business end…
Wow. Very pretty fish, but nasty pointy teeth. ;DBeautiful pics!
Hello there. Just introduce to this site recently by Corey K. and finally got a chance to chime in and say hey. Love the site and look forward to sharing photo info and fish mojo with folks who can appreciate the little things.
Speaking of which, I really dig my old manual focus nikkor 55mm micro. This little critter hitched a ride back in my shirt so I lit him up here in the studio:
Took a couple more with the 105 today.
This one wasn’t the 105, but first shot with 24-70 2.8 – to cute not to share (sorry proud papa).
A
Anyone besides me notice Aarons mind is off fishing ??
Nice baby shots BTW..
🙂
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Hello there. Just introduce to this site recently by Corey K. and finally got a chance to chime in and say hey. Love the site and look forward to sharing photo info and fish mojo with folks who can appreciate the little things.
Hey Doug .. Good to see you post. Welcome to an awesome site. 🙂
This one wasn’t the 105, but first shot with 24-70 2.8 – to cute not to share (sorry proud papa).
Awesome shots Aaron!
There are some incredible shots poated here guys! Thanks for sharing.
I just have a point and shoot olympus 720sw but I capture a decent macro image once in awhile. Nothing as good as the above but ok for what it is.
Anyone besides me notice Aarons mind is off fishing ??
Nice baby shots BTW..
🙂
You’re right Dave, sorry haven’t fished in like 2.5 weeks. I’m both going nuts and falling love with my new little girl. Sorry – will try and get out here in a couple days and fish so I have something more in line with the fishy-related-threads to post.
Anyone besides me notice Aarons mind is off fishing ??
Nice baby shots BTW..
🙂
You’re right Dave, sorry haven’t fished in like 2.5 weeks. I’m both going nuts and falling love with my new little girl. Sorry – will try and get out here in a couple days and fish so I have something more in line with the fishy-related-threads to post.
🙂
AWe will hopefully have a new one of those around here in April..
I’ve asked for a girl, but not sure how much say I have in it.. 😉
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
O.K. Gents, pardon the ignorance and keep the laughter to a dull roar, but is the only difference between a 50, 60, and 100 mm macro the focal distance? i.e. how far the lens can get from the subject and still be in focus?
DustyDusty, I think the difference between the “macro” lenses in say the Canon line is mostly angle of view–the 180mm only 14 degrees and 50mm being around 45 degrees. They all allow close up focusing within inches of one another and the subject (certainly 1-1.5 feet; some 3-4 inches) and life size or near life size magnification (.5-1x), but they also focus to infinity which allows them to be used for general or portrait photography. Quality and lens characteristics also varies.
The exception is the MP-E 65 which is a special critter.
Someone slap me upside the head if I’m wrong.
Thats about right Scott.
Dusty, when shopping for macro lenses probably the biggest consideration is “focal length” as that translates directly to “working distance”. The greater the focal length, the more working distance you have at 1:1…or the lenses MFD (Minimum Focus Distance).
My 180 has a MFD of 18.5 inches. A 100 might have a MFD of 9inches and a 60mm a MFD of 4.
So they can acheive 1:1 magnification, they all will be slow to focus on AF and they all will be wickedly sharp. What separates them is working distance and price.
The more working distance you want, the more it cost.
Bug Shooters like wokring distance primarily due to alot of bugs being skittish. Also less chance you’ll cast a shadow buts secondary to not spooking the subject.By far the most popular macro lens I know of among bug shooters is Sigma’s f2.8 150mm….by far. Its a really great balance of focal length and price.
and yeah the MP65 is another critter.
Wild 5:1 ratio but its hard to use (DoF) and most bug people I know eaither pass or have sold after trying it. Working distance is really small on that lens. I think when I mounted it in store 3:1 , 4:1 and 5:1 could b measured under a couple inches. If memory serves me rights (its been a long time) 5:1 was an inch or less.Its a great lens Dusty, I know a couple people who use it and have never heard a bad thing.
But thats true of all macro lenses. The most common ones both Nikons/Canons…the Sigma 105 and 150 and the Tamron 180 are all rated very highly.
At 1:1 magnification any imperfection will be painfully obvious, so optically they have to be a cut above. So for the most part ( quality control aside) I think any buyer can buy any of those with confidence that they are getting a lens with great optics.
Whats left then really is focal length (working distance) and price.
just an fyi.
The Canon 100 f2.8 retails for pretty much the same price as the Sigma 150mm f2.8. the Sigma 105mm f2.8 is roughly $250.00 cheaper than the Canon.Don’t get me wrong, the Canons a fantastic lens and theres something to be said for proprietary lenses but if theres one area where I tihnk people can be comfortable buying almost any makers comparable lens is the macros.
Have a good look at the Canon 100mm, the Sigma 105mm and the Sigma 150mm. Don’t be afraid to go to your retailer and ask to take test shots with all 3. Put them on manual focus @ f11 to f16, move the body in/out to find the MFD (1:1), get a sense of the MFD for each and take a handful of shots with each to cpmpare.
You might find the Sigma 105 is just as good (or not) and save a couple hundred or spend the same and get the 150mm or stay with Canons 100mm it is after all a fantastic lens
J
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.