Listen to Nikonian and read the posts on his Macro site
The man knows "whatof he speaketh"
Macro is real fun but it ain't gonna happen with an 18-200 zoom.
I have the Canon 100mm 2.8 macro which is a terrific lens which can also serve the purpose of a portrait lens. I used it in March to photo the SEC Women's Gymnastic tournament,you talk about fast it is indeed. The photos were sharp as well as those I took at the Atlanta Zoo on Easter Sunday using this macro lens.
If you want to shoot macro, then by all means get a true macro lens. Just my 2 bits worth.
I bought a Tamron 70-300 Macro lens. I found out later from the good folks here at UHH after I posted some pictures on the Macro forum that it is not a true macro lens. I now just use it as a zoom and maybe some closeups. As soon as I can put it in my budget I will get a true macro lens.
If macro means 1:1, how can they advertise a non-macro as a macro?
Thanks everyone for your comments. I asked the question to learn. The lens was on B&H web site advertised as a Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II Macro Lens.
Bozsik
Loc: Orangevale, California
Nikonian72 wrote:
GoofyNewfie wrote:
It's not technically a macro lens as it only goes to 1:3.7 at 200mm. A true macro will get 1:1. 1:3.7 is pretty darn close though.
For comparison purposes (and a bit of perspective), let us round down to 1:4 magnification (1/4 life-size).
If we photograph a
single domino piece, which is 24-mm wide (approx. 1-inch) and 16-mm high (approx. 2/3-inch),
it will fill the viewfinder and the sensor of an APS-C format DSLR at 1:1 magnification (life-size), but at
1:4 magnification, you will have four dominoes left to right, times four dominoes top to bottom, for a total of
sixteen dominoes in one photo. Not even close to macro!
quote=GoofyNewfie It's not technically a macro le... (
show quote)
:thumbup: If you are using the term macro for close-up pictures, then there are a lot of inexpensive choices. But if you want to do 1:1 you will need a true macro or extension tubes - preferably both. I use both more than just the macro itself.
Georgia Peddler wrote:
Listen to Nikonian and read the posts on his Macro site
The man knows "whatof he speaketh"
Macro is real fun but it ain't gonna happen with an 18-200 zoom.
Yes, and judging from his last post, a very Dominoering presence here.
FilmFanatic wrote:
I don't understand. If you want a macro lens, get a macro lens. Why are you even looking at a super zoom?
I think it's because some lens manufacturers use the macro word silkscreened on the lens and it leads people to believe that it is a macro lens - when it's not.
jeep_daddy wrote:
FilmFanatic wrote:
I don't understand. If you want a macro lens, get a macro lens. Why are you even looking at a super zoom?
I think it's because some lens manufacturers use the macro word silkscreened on the lens and it leads people to believe that it is a macro lens - when it's not.
They did it with ice cream, sort of. Remember the "half gallon" of ice cream? It's now 1 1/2 quarts, at the same or higher price.
Don't forget, you can put a Canon 500D 2-element close up lens on the Tamron zoom for increased close up without loosing any light ( as with tubes ) Cost? about $150 ( on e-Bay )
I too have the Canon 100mm 2.8 macro. It takes wonderful close-ups. I agree, if you want to take macro photos, get a macro lens (or the other valid suggestions re extensions and reversing rings). In the UK there are lots of shops which sell both new and second-hand equipment for much less than new, and I am sure you must have the same in the US. I have bought a lot of my equipment on e-Bay, and have never been let down so far, but I always ask lots of pertinent questions of the seller before I put in an offer. Worth keeping an eye out for e-Bay items, and only bidding at the last instant so you don't end up by pushing up the price and bidding against yourself.
Baz
Loc: Peterborough UK
I have the Tamron 90mm macro, which I'm very pleased with. No fuss lens, and makes a good portrait lens as well. I would have thought that would be in your price range. Personally I would never go for a zoom lens for macro. It's just another problem to through into the equation, also, lens quality is vital at high magnification, which makes most zooms suspect comared to a fixed length lens.
Baz
Loc: Peterborough UK
Really must lern to spel.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.