MechEng Loc: The Mitten

Hi all. My first topic post so be gentle. I did do a search and saw quit a few macro lens questions but nothing that I recognized as what I am asking here. If I missed it, I apologize.

Anyway, I have become intrigued with macro photography so I have been doing some research and reviewing examples considered by peers as excellent to see what/how the final product was produced but no definitive pattern has emerged that I can see.

I don't have a macro lens....never have. One thing I have noticed is that macro lenses seem to be bunched into two categories as it pertains to speed.......f2.8 and f5-f6.3. I understand that f2.8 has shallow dof and would generally require a lot of pics (at various points of focus) stacked up to achieve the dof I see in the excellent examples. The slower lenses tend to be zoom lenses (but some fast macro lenses are zooms as well) and they give greater dof so you might not need to stack any pics or only a few.

But then I read that some lenses portrayed as macro lenses are really not and I get confused. The primary benefit of macro lenses as I understand it is their superior clarity so it seems like any lens labelled as macro would have some minimum clarity to be qualified as such.

My questions are for anyone that actually does macro photography and are:
1. Other than dof, does either the fast or slow macro lenses have other pros and/or cons I should be aware of?
2. Are there any lenses labelled as macro I should steer clear of? (I am not looking at bargain basement here.....let's assume I would spend $400 or more.)

Thank you for your time and I hope I didn't waste it.

Andy

wrangler5 Loc: Missouri

What camera brand. Within each brand there are lenses known to be superb for macro work and people here will know what they are.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

A macro lens is a prime lens and is generally a fast lens, f/2.8. The lenses that you are seeing marked 5.6-6.3 are probably zoom lenses that are able to close focus, the lens manufacturers market these lenses as Macro capable but the truth is that they don't come close.

A macro lens like any other lens can be stopped down by the camera, so if you need to shoot at f/11 or f/16 it is no problem, the camera will take care of that when it fires the shutter. F/2.8 helps in focusing and improves the macro lens' use as a general purpose lens, it does so much more than just macro, it can be a great portrait lens as well.

As far as which lens you should buy, it would be helpful if we knew what camera you are shooting. Personally I have two macro lenses, a Sigma and a Canon, I have never really considered one better than the other, all true macro lenses seem to be really good so you can't miss.

Hope that helped.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Andy, I have two Macros..Nikon Calls them Micro One is a 105 F2.8 and a 200F4

pesfls Loc: Oregon, USA

First off, my only experience in the realm of macro/closeup is with Nikon bodies and Nikkor lenses, extension tubes, etc. Real micro lenses don’t have variable max aperatures. They are single focal length and a single max aperature. If this is your interest start there I think. I can’t attest to the value of the newfound wide max aperature af pieces like f2.8’s. But I can say I’ve never owned a micro lens with af. I tend to use the desired hyperfocal distance and then preview the stop down effects with the dof control before shooting. I have 3 older micro lenses that are mf only and still continue to do well with them, none of which has a max aperature faster than 3.5. Given that, I haven’t had a problem getting the shot I want. I always use a tripod and cable release for those shots fwiw. My point is, don’t get hoodwinked thinking you need the latest technology to make nice closeups.

BassmanBruce Loc: Middle of the Mitten

To me all the above posts are on the money.
Perhaps a visit here will help you as well:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-102-1.html

dwermske

I have been shooting macro for 15+ years. I currently have two different lenses that I work with on my Canon 1D MkII. The first is for studio/indoor use (Canon MP-E 65MM F/2.8 1-5). It can be used outdoors but I don't because you have to get virtually on top of your subject and if the subject moves at all it will sent it out of focus (virtually zero DOF). It is great because it can render a 1-to-1 or up to a 5-to-1 enlargement of your subject. My go-to lens is a Canon EF 180mm f/3.5. It is great outdoors because the long focal length lets you keep some distance from your subject. It will allow you to focus from 1.6' from the film plane to infinity. It will render a 1-to-1 image. I should also note that the F/2.8 and F/3.5 indicates the widest F-stop. The 180MM runs from F/3.5 to F/32 and even at F/32 the DOF on a subject at minimum distance is not much more than a MM or so. I usually set it on F/32 and always use a flash. I also have a 28mm to 135mm telephoto that will allow me to shoot macro but I rarely use the macro function unless it's a last resort. The results aren't that good.

When you shoot macro there is virtually NO DOF. You might expect to get a 1-2mm at most. That is why many macro photographers use focus-stacking to get a greater DOF.

My suggestion would be to rent some different macro lenses that fit your camera, a good tripod, shoot some pics and see for yourself which lens best fits your needs. Everyone has different needs and requirements. It's always best to try it before you buy it. I would suggest that you look for at least a 100mm or greater.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Most "macro" lenses are DESIGNED for close-up work of at least a 1:2 reproduction ratio, have excellent flat field image quality and are prime lenses ( non-zoom). In the past, only Nikon made a zoom "true macro" - today there are none that I am aware of. As a marketing ploy, many lenses are labeled macro but most are limited to 1:3 reproduction.

Today, all true macro lenses are pretty much equal in their image quality and f-stop of 2.8.

..

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

A fast macro will help with keeping a bright image in the VF, and it will help make the lens useful in a non macro role.

The fast speed will seldom, if ever, be useful for the actual image as you will need the DOF of smaller ... higher F number ... apertures.

MechEng Loc: The Mitten

I shoot a T6i and have my eye on a Sigma 105 f2.8. just trying to make sure I understand my options and you're helping with that....thank you!

MechEng Loc: The Mitten

I am shooting a Canon crop sensor camera......and I am partial to Canon and Sigma lenses but that is not a hard and fast rule.

DAN Phillips Loc: Graysville, GA

A few years back Nikon made a 75-300 with close focus capabilities. It's not a true macro but it does a remakable job in certain circumstances. Very inexpensive and well built. I use it quite often when I feel my 40mm macro isn't enough.

SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

Zoom lenses listed as macro are usually not really macro but just closer focus capable. You definitely want a dedicated macro and the Sigma 105mm is an excellent choice! The shallow depth of field is something that can work with the most excellent results! Just have to work with composition.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

You'll be happy with a fixed lens that is specifically made for macro and close up photography. Fast or slow doesn't fall into the equation. Many of your shots will be accomplished with a small aperture to achieve the greatest depth of field. You will also discover that an off-camera flash will be beneficial as well as a tripod. You want to visit a macro forum because macro shooters like to tinker and make some of their own equipment. Water drip photography seems to be reemerging quickly and you might look into that. Macro photographers, from my experience, get the giggles with some of their creations. Weird crowd. :)

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

A great value macro if one is a NIKON shooter is the NIKKOR 28-105 f3.5-4.5 AF-D. It will get you down to 1:2 and is very sharp.

Readily available used and a great sleeper lens.