Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Catmendo

Favorite Canon "Macro"... anyone?

9 posts in this topic

It's time to add a macro into my camera bag. Any suggestions or feedback would be much appreciated at this time! The 28-105 seems to be quite versitile or maybe somthing even longer would be more practical out in the field...any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stu, Canon makes five macro lenses, the 180mm f3.5L, 100mm f2.8, 60mm f2.8, 50mm f2.5, and the very specialized MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro (makes a grain of rice fill the frame).

The vast majority of photographers have no use for the MP-E 65mm, and so the choices generally deal with focal length, ranging from the 50-60mm, the 100mm and the 150-200mm range. Both Sigma and Tamron make excellent macro lenses in the 100mm and 150-180mm range. Most of the so-called macro zoom lenses do not offer true macro capability, and the prime lenses are all sharper than the zooms anyway, so with macro I always suggest people look at the prime (fixed focal length) lenses.

These lenses range from a couple/three hundred bucks up to $1,250 in the case of the Canon 180mm.

People who want to use the lens to photograph butterflies and dragonflies and other insects really have to have the longer focal length because the working distance is greater and they don't tend to spook the critters.

But since you have the 100-400, which with its 6 ft minimum focus distance is a killer butterfly/dragonfly lens at 400mm, I think you can easily get away with a macro in the 100mm range.

I shoot the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro. When doing macro work, even with the lens stopped down, the subject is so close to the lens that depth of focus is very thin, and so a lot of macro photos require very slow shutter speeds to get as much DOF as possible, and that spells a solid tripod, calm conditions and either a remote shutter release or the camera's self timer.

Both the Siggie and Tamron offerings in the same focal length ranges are as sharp as the Canons, though not much less expensive. Also, the Canon 100mm, since it's not an L lens, does not come with a hood or a tripod ring. The tripod ring in particular is good to have because it vastly improves the balance from a tripod. That little sucker runs about $150 and the hood about $40, so if you go that route you can add about $200 to the $450 prices of the 100 macro. However, this lens is as sharp and rich as any canon L lens I've ever shot. I believe either the Siggie or Tamron offerings may include a tripod ring in the price, but you can price shop and compare options online with B&H or Canoga Camera.

There's some food for thought for you, man! gringrin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 28-105 and it is a very usable lens. It's a nice walk around lens when I can't carry a lot of stuff. I seldom use it as a macro (have a 100 2.8 macro in the bag) but when I have, it's been acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, you can always opt for a set of Kenko extension tubes, and use these with your existing lenses. I've heard good things about these and seen some pretty impressive shots to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the Sigma 105mm Macro. It's a very good and sharp lens. It doesn't come with a tripod ring and has no place for one but it's so compact you really don't need one. I would recommend it to anyone looking at getting a great midrange macro lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have a Sigma 105 and really like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention mirror lock-up for macro. The MLU function is a custom function in Canon cameras that has to be activated and deactivated. I'm not sure about Nikon, Olympus and the others, but all (even the entry level) Canon bodies now offer MLU. With the high quality available from the entry level bodies these days, I'd bet all those brands offer MLU on those bodies.

Why use MLU? As the mirror gets out of the way of the sensor when the shutter is tripped, it slaps lightly and causes camera vibration, which can blur a photo when shutter speeds are slow. When MLU is set, the first trip of the shutter locks the mirror in the "up" position, and the second trip engages the shutter to take the pic. If you wait a couple seconds between locking up the mirror and tripping the shutter, any camera shake will dissipate. I typically use MLU for macro or landscape work at shutter speeds slower than 1/30 sec, though I believe mirror slap doesn't impact the image until you're down around 1/8 or 1/4 sec.

You'll definitely want to remember to deactivate it when you are finished with the macro/landscape session. Nothing worse than picking up a camera later to take a picture of a fleeting critter only to have your shutter click lock up the mirror but not take a picture. grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • BB, I cant say I disagree with any of those observations. They didn't produce when it counts. That is what really matters, but it isn't the first time that teams excel in the regular season and flop come playoff time and it certainly isn't something that is isolated to the Wild. The Hawks get some slack because they have won 3 cups in the last 7 years, but fact is they have been bounced in the last 2 1st rounds too. By that, they are no better than us. We will see what happens to the Caps. They have a tough draw with the Pens this round, but its not a stretch to say they will get bounced 2 years in a row and be the Presidents Cup winner. Lots of teams have that issue. Anaheim has had that tendency too. Playoffs are a whole different animal. The team makeup that works in the regular season usually doesn't translate well in the playoffs. I agree the Wild need more beef. Staal certainly helped, but they are far from a heavy team especially on the back end with our D. Early on I thought we had one of the deepest D corps in the league. Looking at them in this playoff series they looked weak. We needed a guy like Folin to step in and play some minutes and make a difference, but he was shell-shocked in his first playoff game. I don't think we have much help in that area in Iowa either. The heaviest guy we have Seeler, is a liability big time and I don't know if he will ever make it up to the big club.
    • You can pre-order on a Japanese web site ... i almost did but got spooked out with all the Japanese language and had no idea how to translate and know what shipping and price was LOL     i want one but will wait!!!  so many lures and not enough time
    • Wow .. Sprinkler!!  Wonder where and when we can get one!!
    • Thanks for the advice guys...keep it coming!   Much appreciated before I make a pretty expensive investment.   Ref
    •   I stated they are better than 3/4 yrs ago compared to themselves...my point is the Wild are far from a top tier top 8 team when it counts come playoff playoff time...period...no arguing what just happened.  BB was very vocal in the Presser..."we need to get Bigger/Stronger" and Fletch missed that boat time and time again. Career Years are great personal stats...am I happy for Granlund, Staal, Nino...yes...but personal stats only gets you more personal $$, but if those stats don't translate into team goals they are all for naught....and every NHL Player will tell you that. They did exceed my reg season projection but their true colors showed losing in the first round so over all I was spot on  IMO this team will be missing more than one of these "career year" guys by the start of the new season if BB has more say...and I am getting the feeling he will be getting more say on personel.
    • We just got shut out down by Caledonia also so don't feel bad and we've been turkey hunting since 1980.  We were on private land also but found the birds still flocked up.  We had flocks of 12 - 15 birds we were trying to work and it didn't work.  2 out of 3 could have shot jakes and we all had plays that just did not work out.  That's turkey hunting.
    • I have mapped but never submitted it to be processed. However I have downloaded maps from insight and used them. They work good if your willing to go thru the extra step to download them. If I remember correctly you will have to choose them in chart options or it will just show your regular insight map. The real nice thing is they are free!   I mostly use Navionics I find I like them better than the insight maps & its easier to download user generated maps.
    • Do you know if the GPS tracker part works without cell service? I think that is going to be my biggest issue, I don't know if I can track another phone from my phone without cell signal.
    • Come on BB, you don't have to be positive or a homer to realize this team is light years better than they were 3/4 years ago. The results haven't changed, but that isn't saying they haven't improved. 3/4 years ago we had young guys like Brodin, Haula, Coyle, Nino just getting their wings. This year they had career years in many cases. That is precisely what we have been hoping/waiting for them to do. The way you talk it seems like you forget that the NHL playoffs are best of 7 series. That's a long grind for any team to make and you have to have a lot of luck and some guys playing out of their mind to make it to the finals. I'm not happy they lost in 5 to the Blues, but I'm not giving up on this team either. They do need to make changes, which will reshape this team for next season. Pump some more youth into the lineup and we could certainly have some up and down next year. Like I said before, go back and see our predictions for where they would finish at the beginning the of the season. I am pretty sure I said they would finish like 5th place. Finishing 2nd all things considered, was a pleasant surprise, but guess what, everyone whined about it! LOL
    • Possible but I'm not sure who owns what patent.
  • Our Sponsors