 Marcie A. Fowler |
Macro Lens for Canon Digital Rebel I love to do macro/close-up shots when shooting photos (mostly nature). I recently purchased a Canon Digital Rebel and am wondering what to look for in a macro lens for it. I see the Canon web site has a few different macro lenses. Seeing as how I'm quite new to the more technical aspects of photography (anything past point-and-shoot), I don't understand a lot of the terminology so I am not sure what it is I'm looking at when viewing the lenses. So if someone out there could break it down in layman's terms it would be wonderful. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bob Cammarata |
A true macro lens will be able to focus close enough to achieve 1:1 life-size reproduction without any lens attachments. What this means (in layman's terms) is that you could photograph an object, such as a dime, at the lens's closest focusing distance. Then, after developing, place the dime over the image on the film and it would cover it completely. (Note: The same size ratio would apply to digital.) Many so-called "macros" are actually close-focusing lenses that achieve 1/2 life-size or less. These are fine for most applications, but may not work for getting eyeball-to-eyeball with insects or other tiny subjects unless you attach an extension tube or tele-converter. A few things to keep in mind when shooting close: - Light and depth of field are minimized the closer you get to your subject. - A longer focal length lens will let you get farther away without spooking skittish subjects. Most macros and close-focusing lenses come in lengths of 50-100mm. You should probably choose one based on its intended use. - Camera and subject movement will be amplified. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
||
photosbysharon.com - Sharon E. Lowe Contact Sharon E. Lowe Sharon E. Lowe's Gallery |
Agree with all Bob had to say. Juste wanted to add some thoughts. Their are some 180mm macro lenses out there for the really skittish subjects you want to capture. But, with your digital rebel, you have a cropping factor and the 180mm would be hard to use to do close-up macros of flowers, for example. I have the D60 and use a Sigma 105mm macro lens, which I love. It is a bit less expensive than the Canon equivalent but is a solid, well-built lens that I would highly recommend you look at. I use extension tubes if I want a closer look at something.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Timothy W. Malone |
Purchasing a macro lens is quite an investment. For those who may want to engage in this fasinating activity, but lack the ability to pay out hundreds of dollars for another lens - try close-up filters for your existing lens sets. These simple screw on "filters" come in differing strengths and can be "stacked" to provide ample strength to photograph small flowers and bugs. If you want to "get eye to eye", as mentioned in another answer, though, you'll need that expensive macro lens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Donna A. Brunet |
I bought a new camera and lenses and started taking close-up photographs last May. I have two Canon macro lenses – 100mm and 180mm. I use both lenses for insect (mostly butterfly) and flower shots. The 180 lets you stand about 1’ farther back and get the same shot – important if the insect you’re after is skittish. I bought the 180 first and I love it – except for the weight. I had to put the shoulder harness that I had on my binoculars onto the camera because there was absolutely no way I could tolerate that much weight on a neck strap even for a short time. The weight sometimes makes my wrist hurt. The 180 needs a bit more light, so depth of field can be a problem without a flash. Once I started using fill flash, I had to get a shoulder mount (which I just got a day or 2 ago and haven’t used yet) because the added weight of the flash made it impossible to hold the camera still. The Digital Rebel weighs a bit less than the 10D, so that would help you with the weight. I bought the 100mm after a 3-day vacation when I was hiking and also carrying a zoom lens. The combined weight of the camera, 180 macro, zoom lens and a pair of binoculars was just too much to deal with. Now that I’ve got experience with both lenses, if I had to choose what to buy all over again, I’d probably only buy the 100mm. It’s easier to deal with physically and I can almost always get a full frame image of butterflies (my main subject) without flushing them. It is also significantly cheaper. On the other hand, it’s hard to get a full-frame of a water strider (Gerridae) even with the 180mm because they flush so easily. So now that I have the 180mm, I wouldn’t want to part with it. But if you look through my photos, you’d see that once I had both, I used the 100mm far more often.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ron Isachsen |
I've got the 100mm and Twin Flash for my Digital Rebel, and all three seem to work in nice combination with each other. For me it's desktop with a Bogen Magic Arm so weight issues are not really a consideration.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Martin Van Vlijmen |
Just remember this about macro shooting just as important as a good macro lens(I have the tamron 90mm macro) is a sturdy well balanced tripod(Gizzo or a manfrotto just to name two) as mentioned with macro you need a stable base to minimize movement. You can have the worlds greatest macro lens but combined with an El cheapo ill build tripod it spells disaster.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||