bleirer

I've been looking at macro options for canon. I have rf mount but have the ef adaptor. Canon RP. I see I can get a Canon 500d dioptor for my rf24-105 for about $150, a reversing ring with 77mm threads to a ef mount for $8, or a basic canon macro lens starting around $250.

For occasional wildflower shots, would the dioptor give good results, do the reversing adapters work, or suck it up and budget for a macro lens?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

A macro lens is the best choice. Extension tubes are also great tools for sharp (non macro) lenses. While out hiking, the extension tube is my preferred method to focus extremely close on flowers along the trail without needing to bring a macro lens on the trip.

agillot

reversing ring work best on a basic 50mm lens . spacers / extension tubes work good , you may loose auto focus , try the MEIKE brand , it come in a set of 3 with different thickness , use one , two , or all three .inexpensive , well made .there is a www.mkgrip.com on the box . the nice thing with tubes you can use them on all your lenses if you have a bunch of them and experiment .

bleirer

So the reversing ring will work on the rf 24-105? Does the zoom still zoom? I assume there is no focus control since it is electronic focus? I assume it is stuck at wide open?

bleirer

I don't see an rf mount on the Meike website. Do you know of a compatible extension?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The 500D will work very WELL on the 24-105 and is the simplest easiest most user friendly quality solution for you !

A dedicated macro will be better if you are serious - but costs more and more size/weight....

.

johntaylor333

I like my Canon 24-70 f/4L which has a 0.7X (not quite macro) in a good all around lens that I keep on the camera.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

My most-used macro lens (on both full frame and crop) is the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM macro... the older non-L, non-IS version that sells for about $600 new. It's a superb lens and the focal length is one of the most versatile... not too short, not too long. It's every bit as good as the L/IS too, except that it lacks IS, which isn't very effective at high magnifications anyway. In fact, when I'm shooting macro I am using a tripod or monopod a lot of the time and/or using macro flash, so have less need for IS... Instead of spending more for the IS version with a red stripe painted on it, I put the money into buying the tripod mounting ring for the lens. That's one of the nicest features of the two Canon 100mm macro lenses... they can optionally be fitted with a tripod mounting ring (sold separately), which is very useful when using the lens. No other macro lens shorter than 150mm offers that feature. The Canon OEM tripod ring is a bit spendy at around $150, but there third party clones for about 1/3 that price (there are also even cheaper ones, but they are plastic and they WILL break... avoid them). The non-L 100mm doesn't come with it's matched lens hood (the L version does)... a little add'l cost. There are also clones avail. at lower cost. It's a large hood though, to reverse over the lens for storage.

There are several quite good 90mm, 100mm, 105mm third party macro lenses in Canon EF mount... all with very good image quality and up to the task, but none with a tripod mounting ring option. The Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 is one of the most affordable (around $350, last time I looked).... it's well made, but slower focusing than the Canon USM lenses. It also doesn't provide "full time manual" override of the AF, the way the Canon USM lenses do.

I also have Canon 180mm macro (great lens, but too long for general use), 65mm ultra high magnification macro (1:1 minimum, great lens, but specialized... too high magnification for general use), Tamron SP 60mm f/2 macro (crop only) and a vintage Tamron 90mm f/2.5 "Adaptall" macro that's been set up for use on Canon EF-mount.

If you can find one of those Tamron Adaptall lenses, that would be an option because there is already an RF mount being made for it. This lens is a manual focus, manual aperture lens... The lens has an aperture control ring right on it, so no problem stopping it down when needed (as there is with reversed lenses, see below). This makes it slower to work with but quite compact. It's also 1:2 maximum, but can be made higher magnification by adding macro extension tubes behind it (I don't see anyone make those yet, but I'm sure some of the third party manufacturers eventually will).

I'm not aware of any macro lens in the $250 range other than the old Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 "Compact Macro". For a lot of macro work, that short a focal length will put you too close to your subject (may be good for indoor, tabletop studio work, though). it's also a 1:2 or half life size lens, not full 1:1 like the above. Canon's EF-S 60mm costs around $350-400, making it one of the more affordable... but it's also a "crop only" lens (yes, you can use them on your R-series.... but you'll end up with greatly reduced size images).

The Canon 500D diopter lens is one of the best. I have one (also 77mm) and can tell you for certain.... it WILL effect image quality: lower contrast and some loss of resolution to some extent. It's also rather pricey (cheaper ones negatively effect image quality more... the cheapest effect it a whole lot more).

With reversing rings you will lose autofocus and... much worse... any means of controlling the lens aperture (I've seen more expensive setups that provide some sort of electronic connectivity, but have no desire to use them). Image quality will not be as good simply using a true macro lens.

Aside from a true macro lens, macro extension rings are one of the best options, in my opinion. I don't see any being made in RF mount yet, but I'm sure someone will intro some soon. Extension rings are much more versatile than diopters and reversing rings, can be used with most any lens. The Kenko set is excellent ($130), equal to the Canon EF, which are only sold individually and cost much more. There are cheaper ($75), but they are more plasticky, not as well made. Avoid still cheaper ones (under $50 for a set, very plasticky) or the cheapest (well under $25, even under $15) which do not have electronic contacts to support AF or aperture control. NOTE: This last type CAN work fine with vintage lenses like the Tamron 90mm mentioned above, which have a mechanical aperture control ring right on the lens. They CANNOT be used effectively with modern, electronically controlled lenses.

Hope this helps!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Right now, anything like that will need to be EF mount and used with the EF-RF adapter. In the future there will no doubt be RF mount versions.... no need for an adapter.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

I think for what you want to do with it, the two-element 500D would be an excellent choice provided you have a good lens you can use it with. It will be sharp, at least in the center, and be easy to carry around. You will probably have to purchase a very inexpensive adapter ring to fit your lens. One advantage is that you will not lose any light with the 500D. I have one that hasn't been used in a long time and I'm thinking about purchasing a ring so I can use it on the end of my 90mm macro lens.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

For occasional use "CHG Canon" make sense. If you want to get deeper 1) Look up Mike Moats 2) If buying a lens I would consider 100MM or longer as it lets you stay back and not scare creatures. Also Having a moving track between the tripod and camera will make it easer to focus (they are cheep- got a new one in Feb for$25.00 and retired my 50 year old one)

bleirer

Thanks for all the info. For now I ordered the low cost ef Meike 3 part extension tube set from Amazon to try it out, since it is an easy return if unsuitable. It says it passes the electronic to the camera. Kit comes with a ring light so we'll see what that is about. Definitely keep my eye out for an rf tube so I can use the better lens and a used macro lens within the budget.

Bill

aellman Loc: Boston MA

You can also use VERY inexpensive front-end lens magnifying "filters." Do
they produce a slightly less than optimal image quality? Yes. Is this negative
factor anything you can notice in typical use of the image? No. I have used
them for decades with excellent results. I know a bunch of members will dump
all over this idea, but try it and see how it works out for you. It could save
you a lot of cash. >Alan

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

The links at the top of page one in the True Macro-Photography Forum provide about all you could want to know about close-up and macro photography: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-102-1.html

aellman Loc: Boston MA

No matter what somebody wants to learn about photography, it's online; accessible by a Google search or a YouTube search. For a given tutorial, there are not just a couple; there might be scores of them. YouTube in particular is a fantastic resource for photography and just about anything else. >Alan