Macro Lens (Fast vs Slow)
Feb 9, 2019 07:04:45 #
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. :)
Feb 9, 2019 07:22:13 #
MechEng wrote:
Hi all. My first topic post so be gentle. I did ... (show quote)
A true macro has at least three important characteristics - provides 1:1 magnification without extension tubes, and a very precise manual (slow) focus, and are optimized for focusing close to their minimum focusing distance. They generally don't need, but often have optical stabilization. And though they can focus at longer distances and infinity, the image quality is usually lackluster at best.
There have been some good zoom lenses that provide decent quality, and can provide 1:2 magnification - good enough for lots of closeup work.
I have two macros - a Sigma 150mm F2.8 and a Tamron 180mm F3.5. Both are very sharp and optically equal to or comparable with Nikkor lenses at half the price.
Nikon made an AF-D lens that was quite good at close distances - the 28-105 f3.5-4.5
here is a sample image, taken hand-held at F8 using a D700. You can usually find them for around $125 in good to excellent condition.
.
Feb 9, 2019 07:26:18 #
MechEng wrote:
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!
While you are looking check out the Tokina Macro 100mm F2.8 D. Very high ratings and lowest price of competitors.
BTW, I have it and love it!
Feb 9, 2019 08:11:12 #
MechEng wrote:
Hi all. My first topic post so be gentle. I did ... (show quote)
Andy,
I have been using macro lenses for a few decades now.
The faster ones work great as general purpose lenses besides macro. This is why it is preferable to have IS like the Canon 100mm f2.8 L. It also works great with IS for hand held macro shots that would be a failure without the IS.
Another feature of a quality macro is more than close focus is the flat field corner to corner ability that other lenses don't have especially wide open. This is great for taking photos of larger flat items that other so called"Macro" lenses can't do. These are generally zoom lenses and the term is loosely used to mean they focus close but generally at the wide end so there is no real macro just close. The only zoom I know of that really deserves the term of macro (Not flat field as a true macro) is the Canon 100-400mm L MII. It gets truly high magnification at 400mm for near the same magnification as many macro lenses but at a greater working distance as shorter macros.
But as to aperture the Micro Nikkor 55mm f3.5 is legendary for it's quality and it goes to 1:2 magnification and 1:1 with the dedicated extension tube. I am guessing this lens goes for about $80.00 now and will work great on both Canon and Nikon cameras and focus to infinity. It is a great value for a superior lens.
Feb 9, 2019 08:16:50 #
I have a Sigma 105 F2.8 lens for Nikon that I am hoping to sell. I haven't used it and am now using Sony cameras.
Pm me if interested.
Pm me if interested.
Feb 9, 2019 08:26:28 #
"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."
The 28-105 is a full frame lens from the film era. It was designed with a "macro" function that is very useful for those times when carrying a macro lens is not practical or desirable. The lens is sharp and as it has been already stated by LWW its price in the second hand market is very attractive. Today many modern zoom lenses are capable of doing decent macro work although the actual lens designed for macro photography excels in quality and it is a prime lens. Macro lenses double as portrait lenses or short teles.
I use a Micro Nikkor 105mm f4 from the 80's and in the past I used the old 50mm f3.5 macro lens. The difference between them is the maximum aperture and the so called working distance which favors the 105 lens.
The 28-105 is a full frame lens from the film era. It was designed with a "macro" function that is very useful for those times when carrying a macro lens is not practical or desirable. The lens is sharp and as it has been already stated by LWW its price in the second hand market is very attractive. Today many modern zoom lenses are capable of doing decent macro work although the actual lens designed for macro photography excels in quality and it is a prime lens. Macro lenses double as portrait lenses or short teles.
I use a Micro Nikkor 105mm f4 from the 80's and in the past I used the old 50mm f3.5 macro lens. The difference between them is the maximum aperture and the so called working distance which favors the 105 lens.
Feb 9, 2019 09:04:06 #
I see we're onto the second page of responses, so I'll add my two cents worth.
As you realize, not all lenses that are labeled "Macro" are truly macro. Read reviews. An f/2.8 lens will get more light to the sensor than an f/3.5. Sometimes that matters, and sometimes it doesn't. The larger aperture lens will cost you more, though. As you stated, a larger aperture will generally get you less depth of field.
Before I buy anything, I read as many reviews and comparisons as I can. I prefer "professional" opinions to opinions of owners.
Lens comparisons -
http://lensvslens.com/
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/lenses
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx
http://www.diyphotography.net/this-website-helps-you-choose-your-next-lens-based-on-the-photos-you-like/
https://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
http://lenshero.com/lens-comparison
http://www.lenstip.com/lenses.html
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare
http://www.lenscore.org/
Macro lenses -
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/best-macro-lenses.htm
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/roundup/lens-roundup/best-macro-lenses-14638
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/best-macro-lens-1310544#article-body
https://loadedlandscapes.com/reviews-best-macro-lenses-nikon
https://photophique.com/best-nikon-macro-lenses/
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/best-macro-lens-1310544/2
https://photophique.com/best-nikon-macro-lenses/
Macro Photography -
https://www.dpreview.com/learn/1063005124/10-macro-photography-tips-for-beginners
http://www.digitalphotomentor.com/the-ultimate-guide-macro-photography/?utm_source=Digital+Photo+Mentor&utm_campaign=d27aaa27fe-DPM_Blog_Broadcast&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ec33f1d0c3-d27aaa27fe-263056661&mc_cid=d27aaa27fe&mc_eid=fddc3ab094
As you realize, not all lenses that are labeled "Macro" are truly macro. Read reviews. An f/2.8 lens will get more light to the sensor than an f/3.5. Sometimes that matters, and sometimes it doesn't. The larger aperture lens will cost you more, though. As you stated, a larger aperture will generally get you less depth of field.
Before I buy anything, I read as many reviews and comparisons as I can. I prefer "professional" opinions to opinions of owners.
Lens comparisons -
http://lensvslens.com/
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/lenses
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx
http://www.diyphotography.net/this-website-helps-you-choose-your-next-lens-based-on-the-photos-you-like/
https://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
http://lenshero.com/lens-comparison
http://www.lenstip.com/lenses.html
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare
http://www.lenscore.org/
Macro lenses -
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/best-macro-lenses.htm
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/roundup/lens-roundup/best-macro-lenses-14638
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/best-macro-lens-1310544#article-body
https://loadedlandscapes.com/reviews-best-macro-lenses-nikon
https://photophique.com/best-nikon-macro-lenses/
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/best-macro-lens-1310544/2
https://photophique.com/best-nikon-macro-lenses/
Macro Photography -
https://www.dpreview.com/learn/1063005124/10-macro-photography-tips-for-beginners
http://www.digitalphotomentor.com/the-ultimate-guide-macro-photography/?utm_source=Digital+Photo+Mentor&utm_campaign=d27aaa27fe-DPM_Blog_Broadcast&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ec33f1d0c3-d27aaa27fe-263056661&mc_cid=d27aaa27fe&mc_eid=fddc3ab094
Feb 9, 2019 09:40:25 #
fetzler
Loc: North West PA
True macro lenses have the following capability
1. at least 1:1 magnification ratio.
2. Flat field of view (no barrel or pin cushion distortion)
Lenses that meet these criteria are fixed focal length and generally have a aperture of f 2.8 - f4. The reason for the 2nd criteria is macro lenses are some times used in copy work that may include art work.
With extension tubes you can use any lens for macro of 3D objects. I have sometimes used wide angle lenses this way. This is really close up work and not real macro. It is a nightmare to use zoom lenses in true macro photography.
1. at least 1:1 magnification ratio.
2. Flat field of view (no barrel or pin cushion distortion)
Lenses that meet these criteria are fixed focal length and generally have a aperture of f 2.8 - f4. The reason for the 2nd criteria is macro lenses are some times used in copy work that may include art work.
With extension tubes you can use any lens for macro of 3D objects. I have sometimes used wide angle lenses this way. This is really close up work and not real macro. It is a nightmare to use zoom lenses in true macro photography.
Feb 9, 2019 09:41:04 #
MechEng wrote:
Hi all. My first topic post so be gentle. I did ... (show quote)
Macro is one area of photography where it's hard to go wrong with a true macro lens - a fast lens is usually good for bright viewfinder images, but you will always stop down a bit to get that ever slim DOF expanded a bit.... but not too much lest you fall into the diffraction trap....f/11 is about right but you can try f/22 to see what kind of effects appear.
Usually lenses wide open in the 5.6+ f number range are not true macros (1:1 mag)....often labeled "macro" on the lens barrel, these telephoto zooms typically go down to 1:3, 1:4, sometimes 1:2, and some of them are very good. But a prime 90mm+ is best - typically f/2.8 +/-. For insects 180++ is best to have some working distance, but I have not had a problem with the Tammy on the D7200 getting bee shots - they usually ignore the 800 pound gorilla with a noisy DSLR.
I got the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 2nd gen (very happy with it) based off of lab test results. But once I get some extra GAS money I might try the Tokina 100mm 2.8** (great value) and the Nikon 60mm** 2.8 *D* lens (multipurpose lens best bought used or refurbished). BTW AF should not be critical for macro - most of the time MF should be used for precise control.
** The Angry Photographer says we're both idiots for not owning these lenses.
Feb 9, 2019 09:44:45 #
Dikdik
Loc: Winnipeg, Canada
Faster lenses reduce your depth of field in focus which can be problematic. They can be used in situations where more lighting is needed. A quality ring flash can help overcome this latter situation.
Dik
Dik
Feb 9, 2019 09:50:30 #
cactuspic
Loc: Dallas, TX
I shoot a number of different macro lenses, all of which are capable of a magnification ratio of at least 1:1, which means a subject will measure the same length on the sensor as it does in real life. As previously stated, current zoom lenses are made for lower magnifications, typically 1:3. This means the length of a image on the sensor will be on third of the length of the subject. The zooms are not true macro lenses despite their marketing.
I have used a number of vintage as well as current macro lenses. There are all well corrected prime lenses of excellent quality. In choosing between the lenses, I used several considerations:
Cost- as a general rule,the longer focal length, the more expensive the lens.
Weight: the longer the focal length, the heavier the lens tends to be.
Distance from subject at 1:1 magnification: the longer the focal length, the greater the distance between the camera and the subject. If you are shooting skittish subject like bugs, the extra distance may be helpful. The shorter the focal length, the more likely you are to cast a shadow on you subject.
Angle of view: longer macro lenses have a narrower field of view, shorter macros have a wider field. Depending on your background, each has its advantages.
Background blur: Blurring the background is easier with a longer focal length.
One lens I particularly like is Sigma’s 150mm macro. It strike a nice balance btween focal length, weight and cost.
I recommend checking out the macro forum. In any case, enjoy but be careful. Macro can be addicting 😊
I have used a number of vintage as well as current macro lenses. There are all well corrected prime lenses of excellent quality. In choosing between the lenses, I used several considerations:
Cost- as a general rule,the longer focal length, the more expensive the lens.
Weight: the longer the focal length, the heavier the lens tends to be.
Distance from subject at 1:1 magnification: the longer the focal length, the greater the distance between the camera and the subject. If you are shooting skittish subject like bugs, the extra distance may be helpful. The shorter the focal length, the more likely you are to cast a shadow on you subject.
Angle of view: longer macro lenses have a narrower field of view, shorter macros have a wider field. Depending on your background, each has its advantages.
Background blur: Blurring the background is easier with a longer focal length.
One lens I particularly like is Sigma’s 150mm macro. It strike a nice balance btween focal length, weight and cost.
I recommend checking out the macro forum. In any case, enjoy but be careful. Macro can be addicting 😊
Feb 9, 2019 10:09:14 #
The Canon 100mm 2.8 L macro is as good as it gets. About $800. (I am a Canon shooter) Any other 100mm fast macro will do as well
Feb 9, 2019 10:39:58 #
Only Nikon made a True Macro zoom in the past? Ever heard of the Minolta AF70-210mm f4 Macro lens introduced in 1985 I believe? Just one example?
imagemeister wrote:
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.
..
Today, all true macro lenses are pretty much equal in their image quality and f-stop of 2.8.
..
Feb 9, 2019 10:44:40 #
Darn... all this talk about macro lenses prompted me to go up on ebay and buy a Sigma 180mm macro to replace my Sigma 150mm OS, have owned the Canon 180 and was not so impressed, the newer Sigma is the better of the two lenses. I will say that I never recommend 180-200mm focal lengths for beginners because motion blur and lens shake makes the longer lenses very difficult to use in the field. If anybody is interested in a like new Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO let me know or you can just wait for me to list it in the Buy/Sell forum.
Feb 9, 2019 10:47:54 #
Also arguably the best macro lens ever made The Minolta AF100mm f2.8 Macro Lens introduced in 1985 also. Read the reviews on this lens. Can be had for a song on eBay. Unless you’re using the Sony A mount it will require an Adapter and be in Manual mode the preferred mode for macro.
markwilliam1 wrote:
Only Nikon made a True Macro zoom in the past? Ever heard of the Minolta 70-210mm f4 Macro lens introduced in 1985 I believe? Just one example?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.