Is it necessary to use a full-frame camera to get the best out of my Canon EF 180mm f3.5 L?

Question

I do mostly handheld macro photography and I currently own a Canon 40D. I want to buy a new camera and I don't know what is the best choice.

My goal is to get the best of my lens. So I'm not sure if full-frame 21mpx 5D MkII or III will give better results than the 18mpx 1.6-crop canon 7D. (Also taking in to account the ISO quality for faster shutter speed pixel density and the resolution of the 180mm.)

Can the 5D get better details then the 1.6 crop?

Asked by Daniel

Answer

Yes

The 5D will get better details than the 1.6 crop. A macro lens will resolve a certain number of line pairs per millimetre. Image sharpness is measured in line pairs per picture height, by using the same lens but with physically bigger sensor you will get more line pairs per picture height, hence more detail in your image.

Another way to look at it is that using a smaller sensor is like making an enlargement, or viewing a portion of an image close up - it's never going to look as sharp under those circumstances.

Now on some lenses corner performance can drop off to the extent that you get better average sharpness (but lower peak sharpness) by using a crop sensor and simply avoiding the extreme corners. Here is an example of such a lens, the Canon 35mm f/2.0:

APS-C corners occur at 13.5mm, where sharpness at f/8.0 (fine blue line) remains above 0.8. On full frame sharpness takes a nose dive starting at 18mm, which corresponds to middle of the left or right edge of the frame. Now compare that to the Canon 180mm f/3.5L Macro:

Sharpness is extremely high right across the frame, there is no notable drop off, meaning your full frame image will be sharper everywhere, even in the extreme corners.

However if both cameras have a similar same number of megapixels then a crop sensor can be very useful for macro photography as it allows you to photograph smaller objects. A true macro lens on full frame will let you fill the frame with an object only 36mm across, whearas with a crop camera you can fill the [1.6x smaller] frame with an object only 22.5mm across. This can be very useful for um, photographing really small things!

Answered by Matt Grum

Check more discussion of this question.

Are screw-on macro lenses worth anything?

Question

I was browsing Amazon looking at a few items and came across this:

4-piece Close-Up Macro Lens Kit - Included are +1, +2, +4 and +10 Close- Up Lenses. High-Quality lenses are diopters for close up photography. They shorten the close focusing distance of the lens, this allows the lens to go closer to the subject and achieves a larger image scale. Lenses may be used individually or in combination for a greater effect.

from what I can tell these screw onto a lens. I do not do macro work but I might want to play around some with macro photography and the price is decent. Are these really worth anything or they junk?

Please Note: I am an amateur and just getting into DSLR World and not a professional.

Asked by Lynda

Answer

These are not 'lenses' in the sense that most photogs think of the word. They're more like a magnifying glass that you screw on the end of the lens as a filter. Generally, they're not too great, especially since better, cheap options exist.

Take a look at this question. Extension tubes are a great way to go. So is a reversal ring. Both of these preserve the original optical quality of the lens as it doesn't introduce any extra glass.

Answered by rfusca

Check more discussion of this question.

What are the biggest differences between Reversal Rings, Extension Tubes and Macro Lenses?

Question

As far as I understand all three options help you do macro photography but are their other reasons for having the three different items? I figured reversal rings and extension tubes were just for the low cost but with additional more expensive features being added to the two options it seems there may be certain situations for each type? What are their biggest differences and advantages over each other?

• Are there situations where you would have one over the other?
• Do all three options have the same "wafer thin" depth of field?
• Do they all suffer from the same light loss?
• Do any of them affect your photos more negatively than the others?
• Can I achieve the same magnification with rings and tubes that I can with proper lenses?
• Would you ever combine these options together or would there be no need for that?

I ask because I recently bought a cheap extension tube and reversal ring and I'm trying to get a better overall understanding of each. I tend to use the extension tube a lot more, because I can put it on my 70-200 and have a workable distance between subject and lens.

This photo was taken with 49mm of extension tube on the 70-200 I believe which may be greater than 1:1. Would it be sharper with a macro lens?

Larger Version on 500px

Asked by Vian Esterhuizen

Answer

Depth of Field

Reversing a lens will produce a very shallow DOF. You may also get distortion and vignetting and have difficulty focusing, as you can only focus at a very narrow range of distances. From memory extension tubes have less DOF than a macro lens, but I am not certain of that.

Light Loss

You will lose 1-2 stops of light using extension tubes. You can argue that macro lenses at 1:1 lose some light (mine reduces from f/2.8 to f/3.5). I don't know about the loss of light with reversed lenses, but it would would seem clear that the light gathering ability of the lens would be reduced when reversed, given that the aperture opening tends to be quite a bit smaller than the front of the lens.

Magnification

You can achieve 1:1 with extension tubes with say roughly 50mm of tubes and a 50mm prime lens. Reversing a lens you can get greater than 1:1.

Quality and Ease of Use

You will lose sharpness in reversing a lens or using extension tubes. You may lose metering and AF capability with a reversed lens (and some tubes), although some reversing rings and extension tubes have metering capability.

An important difference to me is that macro lenses can focus from their min distance to infinity (other two options have a narrow range of focus ability, so the camera and subject must be a certain distance apart). So once you reverse your lens or put on some extension tubes, you will be locking in a certain magnification and subject-camera distance, where a macro lens you can move closer or further away from your subject to compose the shot.

Reversing a lens, or sticking it at the end of some extension tubes, you are not using the lens for what it was originally designed and optimised for, so you wont get the same performance as a dedicated macro lens.

But both options do a good job considering the relatively low cost.

Re: your new question about using them together. Yes, you can use an extension tube or teleconverter with a macro lens to increase magnification, or to give you more working distance for the same magnification. With more working distance and the same magnification, because you are focusing at a greater distance, you should end up with more DOF as well.

Answered by MikeW

Check more discussion of this question.

Screw on Macro Lenses

Question

I was browsing Amazon looking at a few items and came across this:

4-piece Close-Up Macro Lens Kit - Included are +1, +2, +4 and +10 Close- Up Lenses. High-Quality lenses are diopters for close up photography. They shorten the close focusing distance of the lens, this allows the lens to go closer to the subject and achieves a larger image scale. Lenses may be used individually or in combination for a greater effect.

from what I can tell these screw onto a lens. I do not do macro work but I might want to play around some with macro photography and the price is decent. Are these really worth anything or they junk?

Please Note: I am an amateur and just getting into DSLR World and not a professional.

Asked by Lynda

Answer

These are not 'lenses' in the sense that most photogs think of the word. They're more like a magnifying glass that you screw on the end of the lens as a filter. Generally, they're not too great, especially since better, cheap options exist.

Take a look at this question. Extension tubes are a great way to go. So is a reversal ring. Both of these preserve the original optical quality of the lens as it doesn't introduce any extra glass.

Answered by rfusca

Check more discussion of this question.

Do teleconverters work with Macro lenses?

Question

I read that teleconverters don't work with macro lenses. Is that true, and if yes, why?

I have the Canon 100mm f/2.8L macro lens, and I felt that purchasing a 2x teleconverter would be a cheap way of getting a good 200mm lens.

Some suggest placing an extension tube between the teleconverter and the lens, but that is no good for my use, as I would loose the ability to focus to infinity.

Asked by Pete

Answer

Yes they work, I'm sometimes using one with my 100mm non-L macro with good results. However, there is a caveat: Canon and Sigma teleconverters do not work because they physically do not fit. There is a protruding bit at the front of the converter that fits into a corresponding cavity on the back of the lens - and only certain L Canon lenses have this. This means the various 70-200s and the longer tele primes, as far as I know. I don't know if the 100 L macro has this opening, from photos I've seen of it it does not look like it.

I am using a Kenko brand 1.4x teleconverter thas does not have this protrusion, which makes it fit just about any EF lens you'd care to mount it on. I put it on a 17-40L once, for laughs. They do make a 2x converter too. Basically the same products are sold under the Kenko, Tamron and Soligor brand names.

Answered by Staale S

Check more discussion of this question.

Does maximum aperture change with focus distance with the Canon 60mm f/2.8 macro lens?

Question

This site says

The Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens loses 1/2 stop at 1:5, 1 stop at 1:3, 1.5 stops at 1:1.5 and 2 stops at 1:1 (lifesize).

Can anyone confirm that at 1:5 magnification, the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM lens has a maximum aperture of f/3.4, at 1:3 magnification the maximum aperture is f/4.0, at 1:1.5 it is f/4.8 and anything below that is f/5.6?

Asked by Nick

Answer

My Nikon 105mm drops from f/2.8 to f/4.5 at closest focus, so that sounds right.

A post at betterfamilyphotos has a post where they say (emphasis mine):

You would imagine that using a macro lens is the same as using a normal lens, and you would be right except that with a macro lens when you get close to 1x magnification, you start losing light. My 60mm for example starts losing light at close ranges until it reaches 2 stops of light loss at 1x magnification, this means that the effective aperture is f/5.6 instead of f/2.8 (regarding light quantity entering, not DoF). If you are using auto modes on the camera like aperture priority or using flash in TTL mode then the camera will auto compensate for the light loss, but if you're metering light manually you need to take it into account, Canon has included a table in the user manual with the light loss values at each magnification level.

So if you have access to the manual for this lens, or request one from Canon, it should verify the information. It's expected for a close focusing macro to lose 1-2 stops.

Edit: in response to the comment, the above post is incorrect in saying that the reduction in aperture doesn't affect DOF. It does. Two references for those interested in the physics of it:

Cambridge in Colour has a good explantion here (scroll down to LENS EXTENSION & EFFECTIVE F-STOP.

Also see explanation here: Do normal macro lenses suffer the same light reduction as tubes?

Answered by MikeW

Check more discussion of this question.

Maximum aperture change during focus with Canon 60mm f/2.8

Question

This site says

The Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens loses 1/2 stop at 1:5, 1 stop at 1:3, 1.5 stops at 1:1.5 and 2 stops at 1:1 (lifesize).

Can anyone confirm that at 1:5 magnification, the Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM lens has a maximum aperture of f/3.4, at 1:3 magnification the maximum aperture is f/4.0, at 1:1.5 it is f/4.8 and anything below that is f/5.6?

Asked by Nick

Answer

My Nikon 105mm drops from f/2.8 to f/4.5 at closest focus, so that sounds right.

A post at betterfamilyphotos has a post where they say (emphasis mine):

You would imagine that using a macro lens is the same as using a normal lens, and you would be right except that with a macro lens when you get close to 1x magnification, you start losing light. My 60mm for example starts losing light at close ranges until it reaches 2 stops of light loss at 1x magnification, this means that the effective aperture is f/5.6 instead of f/2.8 (regarding light quantity entering, not DoF). If you are using auto modes on the camera like aperture priority or using flash in TTL mode then the camera will auto compensate for the light loss, but if you're metering light manually you need to take it into account, Canon has included a table in the user manual with the light loss values at each magnification level.

So if you have access to the manual for this lens, or request one from Canon, it should verify the information. It's expected for a close focusing macro to lose 1-2 stops.

Edit: in response to the comment, the above post is incorrect in saying that the reduction in aperture doesn't affect DOF. It does. Two references for those interested in the physics of it:

Cambridge in Colour has a good explantion here (scroll down to LENS EXTENSION & EFFECTIVE F-STOP.

Also see explanation here: Do normal macro lenses suffer the same light reduction as tubes?

Answered by MikeW

Check more discussion of this question.

What is considered a professional grade Macro lens?

Question

Macro (or Micro for Nikon) lenses come in different focal lengths, however looking through the current list of canon Macro Nikon Micro lenses they mostly have the same f2.8 apeture. (apart from the 85mm Nikon and 180mm Canon)

Which would be considered entry level and which would be professional, What makes this difference (apart from focal lenth)?

As a comparison to help understand what I am looking for;

The Nikon 24-120 f3.5-4.6 would be entry level whereas the 24-120 f4 is considered a higher quality professional lens (by Nikon NPS)

This also applies to the 50mm f1.8 and the 50mm f1.4.

But what defines the step up to professional quality in this range?

Answer

I don't think there is a big difference between consumer grade and professional grade when it comes to macro lenses, since as you say they are mostly f/2.8, prime lenses, and all very sharp. With zooms you have big differences in maximum aperture, fixed aperture vs variable, and so on.

For Nikon:

• the DX lenses (40mm and 85mm) could be excluded on the basis that they won't work on professional FX bodies

• the PC-E lenses would certainly be considered professional due to the tilt-shift capabilities (and cost!)

• for the most part, I'd consider the lenses with ED glass to be pro lenses. This includes the PC-E lenses mentioned above, the 200mm f/4, the 105mm f/2.8 VR (but also the 85mm f/3.5 VR DX lens)

Nikon Professional Services requires ownership of two pro bodies, but the lens requirement is not specific (can include DX lenses), so I'm not sure Nikon themselves categorise their lenses as consumer or pro grade.

For Canon:

• probably easier to differentiate. The L-series lenses, with UD glass and USM would be obvious "pro" lenses.

Check more discussion of this question.

Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di LD Macro Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras for Canon Rebel T3i

Question

does Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di LD Macro Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras suite my Canon 600D? and is it good for macro photography?

I'm looking for a cheap option (under 200$) to shoot macro photos using Canon Rebel T3i, and I came through this lens.

Answer

The Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di LD Macro lens is compatible with the Canon 600D or T3i. The Di designation actually means that it is compatible with both full frame and crop sensor cameras such as the 600D.

It is a macro lens, so yes it will do macro photography very well. If you are looking for a lens under $200 in this range, that also does macro, this is a viable option and will get it done for you.

Check more discussion of this question.

What is the right lens for shooting car racing with a Nikon D90?

Question

Friend of mine goes on track days quite a bit, and since I no longer own a race-worthy car, I was thinking of tagging a long to get some fun shots of the action.

The track has a few good lookout spots, but you are probably 300-400 meters away from the action. What type of lens would you recommend for a D90 in order to get some good up close shots of the cars in motion, as well as just the overall race?

Answer

300-400 meters is too far away for decent pictures -- you'd need something like a 1200mm lens to get about a 10-meter field of view (which is a lot if you're shooting cars anything but side-on). And acquiring and tracking a moving target with a lens that long is nothing like fun, not to mention the difficulty involved in getting saturated colours at that distance (you'd need to do some post-processing -- haze will suck more life out of the colours than you can imagine if you're not in the desert).

You should be able to get a pass that lets you get into the marshals' area if you ask ahead of time and make it clear that you're there for photography rather than entertainment. That will let you use lenses that are considerably smaller, lighter and more agile. You'll probably still find a good use for a 70/80-200mm zoom (perhaps with a teleconverter) if you're working the corners or hills. The faster, the better if you're shooting cars head-on or tail-on -- for passing shots, you can rely on panning to make the car(s) sharp and the background blurred, but when the cars are moving almost directly toward or away from you, you'll need to rely on a limited depth of field. If you don't own such a lens, you can rent.

You will probably find less use for a wider lens except at the start and finish, but bringing a normal zoom (moderate wide to moderate tele) will cover that if you need it. If you're shooting static vehicles, something on the wide side (16-18mm) will usually add more visual interest than a normal or tele length. Again, whatever you have for a normal zoom will probably cover the territory at the wide end.

Check more discussion of this question.