Canon Close-up Lens Question
Apr 21, 2014 12:07:31 #
I want to buy a close-up lens for my Canon T3i. Looking on the B&H web site I see two Canon items: a 500mm and a 250mm. Those numbers make sense to me when talking zoom & telephoto, but I don't know how to apply them to close-up work. Can someone help?
Apr 21, 2014 12:16:23 #
djmills wrote:
I want to buy a close-up lens for my Canon T3i. Looking on the B&H web site I see two Canon items: a 500mm and a 250mm. Those numbers make sense to me when talking zoom & telephoto, but I don't know how to apply them to close-up work. Can someone help?
The longer the focal length on a macro lens the farther away you'll have to be to the subject. Less scary to little critters. I'l like to have a 180mm macro but.... Just need money.
Apr 21, 2014 12:18:50 #
I think you are referring to the 250D and 500D close up lenses. These numbers refer to approximate distance in millimeters from the front end of the close-up lens to the subject with focus set at infinity. They are excellent for close-up photography, I use both and the results are excellent. I use them on prime and zoom lenses. Depending on the size of the subject remember to allow enough room the get light on the subject.
Apr 21, 2014 12:21:45 #
djmills wrote:
I want to buy a close-up lens for my Canon T3i. Looking on the B&H web site I see two Canon items: a 500mm and a 250mm. Those numbers make sense to me when talking zoom & telephoto, but I don't know how to apply them to close-up work. Can someone help?
Are you by any chance referring to the 250D and 500D close-up lenses?
Woops, Don beat me to it.
I used the 250D a long time ago and while not as versatile as a real macro lens, I thought it did a pretty good job.
Apr 21, 2014 12:26:11 #
Hi djmills - can I assume that when you say "close-up" you mean macro? With Canon T2i and Canon 7D I've used both the EF 50mm f2.5 and the EF-S 60mm f2.8. The 50mm is not a true macro but does a good job with image quality. This is a quality lens with a very moderate cost. The 60mm is an excellent macro lens. I also currently use a Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro with the 7D and currently with with a 5D MK III. I bought this lens used on Ebay. It was in excellent condition and cost slightly under $400. It is an excellent performer and has excellent reviews. You can see some macro pics of both the EF-S 60mm and the EF 100mm on my Flickr site - flickr.com/photos/dugole. I am a DSLR enthusiast, not a pro by any stretch.
Apr 21, 2014 12:32:29 #
Yes, I mean the 250D and 500D. Are you saying that I can get the same picture with each, but can be twice as far away using the 500D?
Apr 21, 2014 13:17:05 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
Yes, the Canon 250D and 500D diopter lenses are high quality. The 250D is higher magnification of the two. You need to buy in the correct diameter for the lens you want to use it upon (the filter thread size). 250D is available in smaller diameters and 500D is available in larger. Somewhere in Canon's documentation I recall seeing recommended lens usage for each.... I think the 500D is recommended for longer telephotos and the 250D for shorter.
No. Just the opposite in fact (assuming both 250D and 500D are even available in the diameter you need for your particular lens)... the 500D doesn't allow the lens to focus as close, doesn't give as high magnification, so the subject will be smaller in the image than it would be if you were using the 250D instead.
However, 250D and 500D work out to be rather expensive and are somewhat limited to use on the particular lens(es) that they fit. If, for example, you want to use them with an 18-55mm kit lens, you need to buy a 58mm diopter lens. Both 250D and 500D are available in this size, selling for around $80-90 apiece. However, if you wanted to use on a Canon 50mm f1.8 lens, you'd need a 52mm diameter, and only the 250D is available in that size. On the other hand, if you wanted to use on a Canon 70-200/2.8 lens, you'd need 77mm and only the 500D is available in that size. Neither is offered in 62mm, 67mm or 82mm, which some Canon lenses now use. It might be possible to use a step up or step down ring in some cases, to make a particular combination work. But, because either type of step ring moves the diopter lens a bit farther away from the lens' front element, there might be some effect on magnification and image quality.
There's also some inevitable loss of image quality, any time you add any optics to the front of a lens. While the Canon close-up diopters are very high quality dual element to keep loss to a minimum, neither the 250Ds or 500Ds appear to have any lens coatings. So they are a bit prone to "veiling flare". I wouldn't use them without also using a good fitting lens hood. It is possible to boost contrast and saturation in post processing, to offset the effects of veiling flare to a large extent.
You might want to consider another way of "shooting macro" on a budget: Macro extension tubes. These are usable on nearly any lens and merely move the lens farther away from the camera so that it focuses closer. There are no optics in them, so in general they have minimal effect on image quality. With tubes there can be some optical vignetting and softer corners with certain lenses, especially if used at large apertures, but that's more due to the lens' design, than to the extension tube. Stopping down a bit can correct both to some extent. And it's not necessarily a bad thing... I have deliberately used my Canon EF 50/1.4 with macro tubes, to cause this effect in some images. It gives the images sort of a dreamy effect. Here's an example...
https://farm7.staticflickr.com/6179/6144045867_eed16384c3.jpg
Canon sells macro tubes, too, individually in 12mm and 25mm lengths. But a better deal might be a set of three tubes from Kenko, Opteka or Zeikos. These can be used on virtually any lens to produce higher magnification shots (they are most practical to use on short telephotos, same as the 250D and 500D diopter lenses) You can increase or decrease the magnification by adding more or less extension.
The Kenko tube set includes 10mm, 20mm and 36mm tubes for about $200 and is pretty much equal in quality to the individual Canon tubes. The Canon sell for about $140 for the 25mm and about $85 for the 12mm.
The Opteka and Zeikos sets are both a bit more plasticky, but still workable and cost around $75-90 for a set of three. The Opteka have 10mm, 20mm and 36mm, same as the Kenko. The Zeikos set includes 11mm, 21mm and 31mm tubes (and sells under a bunch of different names in addition to Zeikos: you'll also find them labeled Vivitar, Dot Line, Bower, Pro Optic, Jessops and many more.) There is an even cheaper version of the Zeikos - about $50 - that's all plastic, even the bayonet mounts.
All the above have electronic contacts so that your lens will still auto focus and you'll have control over the aperture. There are even cheaper sets (some under $10) that don't have the electronic contacts and I don't recommend for general use (they are fine with vintage, manual focus/manual aperture lenses... but a pain to use with modern electronically controlled lenses).
One thing, if you want to use these on a Canon EF-S lens, be sure to get compatible versions. Most that are sold new today can fit both Canon EF and EF-S lenses, but older ones were EF only. Kenko marked "CA/AFs" (note the small "s" ) are EF-S compatible. Opteka are new to the market and seem to all be both EF and EF-S compatible. With the Zeikos, check the specs or look for illustration of the actual tubes, that they have the little white box registration mark of EF-S lenses.
None of the above are as convenient or will give the same image quality as a true macro lens. There are a lot of very good macro lenses available, too. The Canon 60mm and 100mm USM (not the L/IS) are relatively affordable. Tamron SP 60mm and 90mm (with and without VC). Tokina offers a nice, affordable 100mm. And Sigma offers a lot of different macro models ranging from 50mm to 180mm. You really can't go wrong with any of these, in terms of image quality. Decide among them based upon their price, focal length and other features.
Macro lenses are nearly all "flat field" optical design, which makes for better edge to edge sharpness and even illumination at close focusing distances. Macro lenses have to move their focusing group a long, long way to go from infinity to 1:2 or, more commonly, full 1:1 (lifesize) magnification. This generally makes them slower focusing than similar focal length, non-macro lenses. They also use "long throw" focus mechanisms that emphasize accuracy over speed, since precise focus is extra important due to shallow depth of field at high magnifications. But some macro lenses have focus limiters and/or faster focus drive mechanisms, such as Canon's USM, Sigma's HSM or Tamron's USD. These features can help with focus performance, but might add cost.
I recommend folks using crop sensor cameras such as yours consider lenses in the 90 to 105mm range as a good compromise. Shorter focal lengths such as 50mm and 60mm put you pretty close to the subject (but can be lower cost and more compact), which can be a problem some of the time for some types of subjects. Longer focal lengths such as 150mm and 180mm are difficult to get a steady shot, due to the long focal length and because you need to use a pretty small aperture to adequate depth of field (DOF gets very shallow at high magnifications, and a longer focal length will render even shallower DOF).
Personally I have a Canon 180mm, but mostly use it on full frame and film cameras. On crop cameras I mostly use a Canon 100mm USM and find it ideal. In fact I use it a lot on full frame/film cameras, too. And I recently got a Tamron 60mm, which is designed specifically for crop cameras... and is very compact compared to my other macro lenses. I tuck it in the corner of my camera bag when I don't know if I'll need a macro lens, but hate to leave home without one. I also have a Canon MP-E 65mm macro lens, which is a special, ultra high magnification, manual focus only lens. I don't recommend it for beginning macro shooters, as it's a rather difficult lens to use and pretty much a "tripod only" lens.
Speaking of tripods... a lot of macro work is best done on a tripod or at least a monopod. Some macro lenses have option to be fitted with or come fitted with a tripod mounting ring, which makes them more convenient to use on a tripod or monopod. The Canon 100mm USM and 100L IS both can be fitted with optional (sold separately) tripod rings. The 150mm and 180mm macro lenses all come with tripod rings. More compact lenses might not need the ring, since the entire camera can pretty easily be rotated... but it's very nice to have these rings on the larger lenses.
Another feature to look for is Internal Focusing (IF). This means the macro lens doesn't grow in length when it's focused closer. Some macros that don't have IF double or triple in length, taking up some more of the already short working space between the lens and the tiny subject. The Canon 60mm, both 100mm and 180mm are all IF lenses. So is the Tamron 60mm. Others are, too, I'm sure, but you'll need to check their specs if you want this feature.
Incidentally, macro extension tubes can be used in conjunction with macro lenses, to make them able to shoot even higher magnification. In my Canon kit I have a Kenko set, two Canon 12mm and one Canon 25mm. I've always made a point of carrying at least one set of macro tubes, since learning to use them and how handy they are, two or three decades ago.
Whatever you do... get a diopter lens or two, get a set of macro extension tubes, or buy a true macro lens... Have fun shopping!
EDIT: Yes, there are some other ways to "do macro"... such as reversed lenses and reversed/stacked lenses. The problem with reversed lenses is the same as the really cheap macro extension tubes... there is no way to control the lens aperture directly. There are some work-arounds, but it is a really slow and fussy method that's hardly worth it. You have to remove the lens and remount it twice any time you want to change the aperture setting (or just shoot everything with the aperture wide open and deal with the really shallow depth of field this will cause). Focus will be strictly manual, too, of course (not too big a deal... with macro it's often easier to focus manually anyway).
The reversed/stacked lenses technique essentially uses a second lens instead of the 250D or 500D. It's a matter of finding a particular combo that will work... such as an 85mm lens on the camera, with a 28mm or 35mm lens with the same filter thread, reversed in front of it. In this case, since the base lens is mounted normally, you do have control over the lens aperture and will still have working auto focus. If you happen to have two compatible lenses, it can be pretty cheap to set this up (all you need it a special ring that allows the two lenses to be screwed together via their filter threads). But it's anyone's guess, what will work well and what won't. Try to find some other folks who have done the leg work and spent the money to find a combo that works, to save a lot of costly experimentation.
I've also heard of removing the front element group from one of the older Canon EF zoom lenses, to effectively turn it into a macro-only lens. It will never focus to infinity again, after this is done. But can be a cheap macro solution, should still auto focus and you'll have normal aperture control. I don't recall what lens folks liked to use for this... I think it was something like a 35-80 zoom, but look online for more info, if interested in trying this.
Quote:
Are you saying that I can get the same picture with each, but can be twice as far away using the 500D?
No. Just the opposite in fact (assuming both 250D and 500D are even available in the diameter you need for your particular lens)... the 500D doesn't allow the lens to focus as close, doesn't give as high magnification, so the subject will be smaller in the image than it would be if you were using the 250D instead.
However, 250D and 500D work out to be rather expensive and are somewhat limited to use on the particular lens(es) that they fit. If, for example, you want to use them with an 18-55mm kit lens, you need to buy a 58mm diopter lens. Both 250D and 500D are available in this size, selling for around $80-90 apiece. However, if you wanted to use on a Canon 50mm f1.8 lens, you'd need a 52mm diameter, and only the 250D is available in that size. On the other hand, if you wanted to use on a Canon 70-200/2.8 lens, you'd need 77mm and only the 500D is available in that size. Neither is offered in 62mm, 67mm or 82mm, which some Canon lenses now use. It might be possible to use a step up or step down ring in some cases, to make a particular combination work. But, because either type of step ring moves the diopter lens a bit farther away from the lens' front element, there might be some effect on magnification and image quality.
There's also some inevitable loss of image quality, any time you add any optics to the front of a lens. While the Canon close-up diopters are very high quality dual element to keep loss to a minimum, neither the 250Ds or 500Ds appear to have any lens coatings. So they are a bit prone to "veiling flare". I wouldn't use them without also using a good fitting lens hood. It is possible to boost contrast and saturation in post processing, to offset the effects of veiling flare to a large extent.
You might want to consider another way of "shooting macro" on a budget: Macro extension tubes. These are usable on nearly any lens and merely move the lens farther away from the camera so that it focuses closer. There are no optics in them, so in general they have minimal effect on image quality. With tubes there can be some optical vignetting and softer corners with certain lenses, especially if used at large apertures, but that's more due to the lens' design, than to the extension tube. Stopping down a bit can correct both to some extent. And it's not necessarily a bad thing... I have deliberately used my Canon EF 50/1.4 with macro tubes, to cause this effect in some images. It gives the images sort of a dreamy effect. Here's an example...
https://farm7.staticflickr.com/6179/6144045867_eed16384c3.jpg
Canon sells macro tubes, too, individually in 12mm and 25mm lengths. But a better deal might be a set of three tubes from Kenko, Opteka or Zeikos. These can be used on virtually any lens to produce higher magnification shots (they are most practical to use on short telephotos, same as the 250D and 500D diopter lenses) You can increase or decrease the magnification by adding more or less extension.
The Kenko tube set includes 10mm, 20mm and 36mm tubes for about $200 and is pretty much equal in quality to the individual Canon tubes. The Canon sell for about $140 for the 25mm and about $85 for the 12mm.
The Opteka and Zeikos sets are both a bit more plasticky, but still workable and cost around $75-90 for a set of three. The Opteka have 10mm, 20mm and 36mm, same as the Kenko. The Zeikos set includes 11mm, 21mm and 31mm tubes (and sells under a bunch of different names in addition to Zeikos: you'll also find them labeled Vivitar, Dot Line, Bower, Pro Optic, Jessops and many more.) There is an even cheaper version of the Zeikos - about $50 - that's all plastic, even the bayonet mounts.
All the above have electronic contacts so that your lens will still auto focus and you'll have control over the aperture. There are even cheaper sets (some under $10) that don't have the electronic contacts and I don't recommend for general use (they are fine with vintage, manual focus/manual aperture lenses... but a pain to use with modern electronically controlled lenses).
One thing, if you want to use these on a Canon EF-S lens, be sure to get compatible versions. Most that are sold new today can fit both Canon EF and EF-S lenses, but older ones were EF only. Kenko marked "CA/AFs" (note the small "s" ) are EF-S compatible. Opteka are new to the market and seem to all be both EF and EF-S compatible. With the Zeikos, check the specs or look for illustration of the actual tubes, that they have the little white box registration mark of EF-S lenses.
None of the above are as convenient or will give the same image quality as a true macro lens. There are a lot of very good macro lenses available, too. The Canon 60mm and 100mm USM (not the L/IS) are relatively affordable. Tamron SP 60mm and 90mm (with and without VC). Tokina offers a nice, affordable 100mm. And Sigma offers a lot of different macro models ranging from 50mm to 180mm. You really can't go wrong with any of these, in terms of image quality. Decide among them based upon their price, focal length and other features.
Macro lenses are nearly all "flat field" optical design, which makes for better edge to edge sharpness and even illumination at close focusing distances. Macro lenses have to move their focusing group a long, long way to go from infinity to 1:2 or, more commonly, full 1:1 (lifesize) magnification. This generally makes them slower focusing than similar focal length, non-macro lenses. They also use "long throw" focus mechanisms that emphasize accuracy over speed, since precise focus is extra important due to shallow depth of field at high magnifications. But some macro lenses have focus limiters and/or faster focus drive mechanisms, such as Canon's USM, Sigma's HSM or Tamron's USD. These features can help with focus performance, but might add cost.
I recommend folks using crop sensor cameras such as yours consider lenses in the 90 to 105mm range as a good compromise. Shorter focal lengths such as 50mm and 60mm put you pretty close to the subject (but can be lower cost and more compact), which can be a problem some of the time for some types of subjects. Longer focal lengths such as 150mm and 180mm are difficult to get a steady shot, due to the long focal length and because you need to use a pretty small aperture to adequate depth of field (DOF gets very shallow at high magnifications, and a longer focal length will render even shallower DOF).
Personally I have a Canon 180mm, but mostly use it on full frame and film cameras. On crop cameras I mostly use a Canon 100mm USM and find it ideal. In fact I use it a lot on full frame/film cameras, too. And I recently got a Tamron 60mm, which is designed specifically for crop cameras... and is very compact compared to my other macro lenses. I tuck it in the corner of my camera bag when I don't know if I'll need a macro lens, but hate to leave home without one. I also have a Canon MP-E 65mm macro lens, which is a special, ultra high magnification, manual focus only lens. I don't recommend it for beginning macro shooters, as it's a rather difficult lens to use and pretty much a "tripod only" lens.
Speaking of tripods... a lot of macro work is best done on a tripod or at least a monopod. Some macro lenses have option to be fitted with or come fitted with a tripod mounting ring, which makes them more convenient to use on a tripod or monopod. The Canon 100mm USM and 100L IS both can be fitted with optional (sold separately) tripod rings. The 150mm and 180mm macro lenses all come with tripod rings. More compact lenses might not need the ring, since the entire camera can pretty easily be rotated... but it's very nice to have these rings on the larger lenses.
Another feature to look for is Internal Focusing (IF). This means the macro lens doesn't grow in length when it's focused closer. Some macros that don't have IF double or triple in length, taking up some more of the already short working space between the lens and the tiny subject. The Canon 60mm, both 100mm and 180mm are all IF lenses. So is the Tamron 60mm. Others are, too, I'm sure, but you'll need to check their specs if you want this feature.
Incidentally, macro extension tubes can be used in conjunction with macro lenses, to make them able to shoot even higher magnification. In my Canon kit I have a Kenko set, two Canon 12mm and one Canon 25mm. I've always made a point of carrying at least one set of macro tubes, since learning to use them and how handy they are, two or three decades ago.
Whatever you do... get a diopter lens or two, get a set of macro extension tubes, or buy a true macro lens... Have fun shopping!
EDIT: Yes, there are some other ways to "do macro"... such as reversed lenses and reversed/stacked lenses. The problem with reversed lenses is the same as the really cheap macro extension tubes... there is no way to control the lens aperture directly. There are some work-arounds, but it is a really slow and fussy method that's hardly worth it. You have to remove the lens and remount it twice any time you want to change the aperture setting (or just shoot everything with the aperture wide open and deal with the really shallow depth of field this will cause). Focus will be strictly manual, too, of course (not too big a deal... with macro it's often easier to focus manually anyway).
The reversed/stacked lenses technique essentially uses a second lens instead of the 250D or 500D. It's a matter of finding a particular combo that will work... such as an 85mm lens on the camera, with a 28mm or 35mm lens with the same filter thread, reversed in front of it. In this case, since the base lens is mounted normally, you do have control over the lens aperture and will still have working auto focus. If you happen to have two compatible lenses, it can be pretty cheap to set this up (all you need it a special ring that allows the two lenses to be screwed together via their filter threads). But it's anyone's guess, what will work well and what won't. Try to find some other folks who have done the leg work and spent the money to find a combo that works, to save a lot of costly experimentation.
I've also heard of removing the front element group from one of the older Canon EF zoom lenses, to effectively turn it into a macro-only lens. It will never focus to infinity again, after this is done. But can be a cheap macro solution, should still auto focus and you'll have normal aperture control. I don't recall what lens folks liked to use for this... I think it was something like a 35-80 zoom, but look online for more info, if interested in trying this.
Apr 21, 2014 13:34:00 #
Another inexpensive macro technique is to buy a reversing ring for your lens. You definitely need a tripod for this but a reversing ring is only a few dollars.
http://www.savingtosaving.com/Julius-Studio-58mm-Macro-Reverse-Adapter-Ring-for-CANON-EOS-EF-Mount_p_150.html
You will have to get one that fits the lens you want to use and for your camera. I just grabbed this site for an example. I have never done business with these people.
http://www.savingtosaving.com/Julius-Studio-58mm-Macro-Reverse-Adapter-Ring-for-CANON-EOS-EF-Mount_p_150.html
You will have to get one that fits the lens you want to use and for your camera. I just grabbed this site for an example. I have never done business with these people.
Apr 21, 2014 17:17:38 #
Apr 21, 2014 17:27:56 #
Apr 21, 2014 18:53:53 #
amfoto1 wrote:
Yes, the Canon 250D and 500D diopter lenses are hi... (show quote)
Thanks for all the info. I just got a Tamron 90mm in the mail today and just tried it out. I appreiate all your input, I learned a LOT. :D
Apr 22, 2014 08:10:01 #
Apr 22, 2014 08:12:05 #
One caveat from me... Get a source of additional illumination, be it a ring light or speedlight with a diffuser. While great for studio use or static subjects, tripods are less useful in the field when shooting live, mobile critters. I Use a ring/point light almost exclusively for my macro shooting as I shoot many insects. The use of it allows me to stop down the lens for added DOF (where DOF is acutely thin as it is)And the short duration of the flash stops motion (be it mine or my subjects)... I can either use the setup as a "fill flash" (thus preserving background ambient light illumination) or as the main source of illumination (thus "blackening" out a distracting background)... The vast majority of macro images on my Flickr stream were done handheld ( My go to macro lens is an older "Lester Dine" unit made by Kino Precision (aka Kiron) back in the 1980's... The ring/point light is also branded as a Dine unit & was made by Sunpack... The Dine Corp (purveyors to the Medical/Dental profession) is still in business.... I however, shoot Nikon... Another point I don't think got mentioned, is that with true macro lenses as opposed to most other less expensive alternatives, is that you don't lose infinity focus & the magnification ratio can be varied without having to resort to adding/removing tubes/filters (lenses)
Apr 22, 2014 11:36:59 #
FYI - The Canon 500D is a +2 diopter and the 250D is a +4 diopter. These - http://www.ebay.com/itm/XPRO-F500-67mm-Close-Up-Lens-Macro-lens-Super-Macro-Conversion-Lens-/280874520769?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item41656d10c1 - close up lenses are as good as Canon's, are multicoated, and come in different sizes. Marumi makes some nice ones also in more sizes yet. Marumi makes a +3 diopter - which is what I would recommend for a single solution close-up. If you are unsure of which diopter will work for you, buy a cheap set to experiment with before committing large monies to the 2-element expensive ones.
Apr 22, 2014 12:23:49 #
imagemeister wrote:
FYI - The Canon 500D is a +2 diopter and the 250D ... (show quote)
Thanks. Great advice & valuable information.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.