Printable View
I am debating on if I should get a dedicated macro lens, or just get some different sized extension tubes to use with my existing lenses. Right now I have a 50mm 1.4 and a 70-200 4.0. I was looking at something like a 100mm macro if I decided to go in that direction. Anyone have any suggestions? Will I just loose stops using tubes, or will I loose a lot of image quality as well?
Totally different Bryan You should get both !!
The extension tube will allow you to get closer but will not substitute the Macro lens. Even with a macro lens you will be needing extension tubes. Would get a pair of 25mm tubes. btw they are very useful even with longer lenses, I use them them with the 500.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Panting
Bryan, there is an interesting discussion about using extension tubes and long lenses on this site: http://photo.net/nature-photography-forum/00GsAS
Cheers, Jay
I have to agree with Al. Consider the Kenko tube sets. I use them with my 500mm, 400mm and 70-200mm.
Bryan,
I cannot offer any advise, as I do not know what you intend to photograph.
Chas
Thanks for the advice. The Kenko tubes were the ones I was looking at picking up. I guess maybe i will get them first and then maybe pick up the lens after that.
Sorry i guess I should have mentioned that in my first post. Mostly would like to use it for flowers and insects, but I am usually up for shooting anything that I find interesting.Quote:
I cannot offer any advise, as I do not know what you intend to photograph.
For flowers and insects, you should get a dedicated macro lens. Sigma macro lenses offer a good deal for the price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Panting
I know you asked for advice and I'm going to suggest a book. I just finished reading "Understanding Close-Up Photography" by Bryan Peterson (the guy who wrote the classic "Understanding Exposure"). It just may be the best macro/close-up book I've read and I have about a dozen of them. In it he goes through all the options: macro lenses; tubes; close-up lenses/filters like the Canon 500D which you can add to your 70-200; he even talks about shooting wide angle close-ups (with a 12-24mm lens and a 500D) and other interesting combinations. The book is about $17 on Amazon and may be the best $17 you'll spend.
For what it's worth, I use the Sigma 150mm and 70mm macro lenses. I also have the Canon 500D close-up filter and I have a set of Kenko tubes. I use them all for different purposes. If I had to choose just one, it would be the lens and I would go with something longer than the 100mm like the 150mm or even an 180mm (You can go with a Canon; Nikon has a 200mm, I believe; Sigma; Tamron; they're all good). You really will want a lens with a tripod mounting collar. It makes it a whole lot easier to go from landscape to portrait and back again.
Hope this helps.
Ed, a peek into the book and a question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Vatza
Peek: what did he say about the 500D filter; I am debating whether to purchase.
Question: Why longer than the 100mm f/2.8 Macro? Working distance between the lens and subject?
Thanks, Jay
Bryan,Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Panting
Longer focal length means greater working distance between you and the subject, often at the same magnification. Many butterflies are skittish and may require a 300 f/4 with extension tubes. Longer focal length also makes it easier to isolate the subject, manipulate strobe placement, and change the background due to narrow field of view.
Extension tubes are extremely versatile working with any lens, and in conjunction with converters when necessary. Moreover, extension tubes do not introduce additional glass elements as do diopter lenses/filters.
Macro lenses typically fall between 50-200mm, they offer superb resolution and are corrected for flat field (copy work).
Wide angle zooms typically offer close-focus (not true macro) capability... letting you make the subject large in the frame while including much of the background if desired.
A lot to think about ;)
Best,
Chas
Basically, he said the 500D is the only close-up lens/filter worth purchasing (even for a dyed-in-the-wool Nikonian) and that basically anyone who shoots close-ups should have one. While Canon advertises the 500D for longer focal lengths, there is no reason not to use it with a 24-70, for example. And i am really intrigued by his use with a wide angle lens. The idea of the 500D on my Sigma 10-20 just intrigues the heck out of me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Gould
Yes, working distance. But even more than that, you definitely want to buy a lens with a collar that you can loosen and rotate the camera anywhere from horizontal to vertical and anywhere in between. With close-up/macro work, I often could care less about the a horizon line. It getting the right angle for the composition. The collar allows that to happen much easier than messing with a ball head for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Gould
Bryan,
I too would suggest getting both a dedicated macro and a set of Kenko extension tubes. I find that i use both. When doing small bird photography at feeders i find the extension tubes invaluable for use in close focusing my old Sigma 500 because the minimum focus distance is too long. They are also helpful as noted for using a telephoto to shoot shy insects you can't get close to.
With regards to a true macro there is nothing like being able to shoot a small insect at one to one magnification. then with the addition of extension tubes being able to magnify your image beyond that.
In summary get both.
God's light and love to all,
chris
I agree, both are unique and have combined value.
I say the obvious upgrade would be first - tubes, then a dedicated macro lens to follow (as tubes will compliment both).
I know a handful of flower / mushroom photographers that don't use macro lenses, so it could potentially be overkill to add another lens to your bag.
I find the 500D works better with longer focal lengths (e.g. 70-200, 300, 400). The telephotos don't perform best at minimum focus distance. You get better image quality (albeit greatly reduced working distance) shooting something like a frog with a 70-200/300/400 + 500D. The 500D can be another heavy addition to a camera bag though, so I typically settle with a few tubes.
Chris, when you are uising a tube with the 500, is that because you do not have another lens, e.g., 70 - 200 with you? Would you still use the tube if you had a shorter focal lens with you are the time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen
Thanks.
