Macro Photography
Jul 6, 2013 14:10:00 #
My question is what is the difference between a 24 to 70 2.8L Canon lens with macro capabilities at 1.3' and a Canon 100m 2.8L macro lens Would it be worth the $1000 investment to purchase the 100m macro lens.
Thanks for input
Thanks for input
Jul 6, 2013 14:16:48 #
lindmike wrote:
My question is what is the difference between a 24 to 70 2.8L Canon lens with macro capabilities at 1.3' and a Canon 100m 2.8L macro lens Would it be worth the $1000 investment to purchase the 100m macro lens.
Thanks for input
Thanks for input
The 28-70 does not focus to true macro, which is 1:1. The "worth" of any one lens is personal. There are a number of other options which will get you to 1:1 (image size replicated on sensor). The UHH macro section has a lot of detail about this field of photography.
Jul 6, 2013 14:39:47 #
Close up filters are another way to get macro photos without the high price tag. They actually work very well.
Jul 6, 2013 14:42:51 #
Jul 6, 2013 14:43:12 #
Jul 6, 2013 14:46:58 #
Whimzey wrote:
.Close up filters are another way to get macro photos without the high price tag. They actually work very well.
Take a look at the Raynox250. Extension tubes are another option
Jul 6, 2013 14:48:34 #
Jul 6, 2013 14:55:13 #
If what you want is true 1:1 macro the 100 mm f2.8 is worth every penny. Not only do you get the macro but this is a wonderfully sharp lens, sharper than zooms. You can also use it for portraits, and I have even used it for sports when I could get close enough. Check out the true macro photography section and most there shoot the 100 or the equivalent on their camera.
Jul 6, 2013 15:01:33 #
Jul 6, 2013 15:01:34 #
Jul 7, 2013 10:54:08 #
24 70 is not a Macro lens. The 100 mm 2.8 L is a great lens, not just for macro but for portraits as well. If you have the $$$... Its worth it. I have it and I am verry pleased with it.
Jul 7, 2013 11:26:08 #
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
.
Take a look at the Raynox250. Extension tubes are another option
Take a look at the Raynox250. Extension tubes are another option
A set of tubes for $15 - $35 sure beats hundreds of $ for a lens.
Jul 7, 2013 13:42:02 #
Jul 7, 2013 13:42:03 #
Jul 7, 2013 13:44:09 #
The difference is - how close do you really want to get ? and what are your IQ requirements ? Most closeups of live subjects require a minimum of 100mm for a reasonable working distance. Like most zooms, the 24-70 at close up range, the 70mm winds up being about 50mm equivilent. There are many other cheaper options than spending $1000 for a "macro" lens. Personally, I like the 70-200 F4L with 1.4X and Canon close up lens - especially for live disturbable subjects. ... - an example below. And yes, I know this "only" close up and not technically "macro ". This was shot at about 1:4
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.