Beginner to Macro - what options on Canon?

hiphopopotamus

hiphopopotamus

Messages
321
Edit My Images
No
I'd really like to try out some decent macro photography, but not sure where to start on a limited budget (currently my main objective is to upgrade my 400d to either a 40d/50d and get a good walk around lens with it).

I bought an old "sigma 70-300 super II macro" a while ago on the cheap to give macro a shot, but I think the lens is a bit loud, slow and doesn't focus all that well for macro purposes. But for the price I paid I can't complain. I did manage to get a couple of shots of a few ladybirds after a recent infestation, but indoors this lens required the flash, even in a very very brightly lit room, which didn't give the greatest result. So I'd like to move on to a proper macro lens. I know I'll enjoy it, so I don't want to go through all the hassle extension tubes might cause, I'd rather get a dedicated lens.

If any of you were starting to experiment with macro, particularly insects, what lens would you recommend to a beginner with a canon 400d/40d/50d?

Thanks
 
hiphopopotamus said:
I'd really like to try out some decent macro photography, but not sure where to start on a limited budget (currently my main objective is to upgrade my 400d to either a 40d/50d and get a good walk around lens with it).

I bought an old "sigma 70-300 super II macro" a while ago on the cheap to give macro a shot, but I think the lens is a bit loud, slow and doesn't focus all that well for macro purposes. But for the price I paid I can't complain. I did manage to get a couple of shots of a few ladybirds after a recent infestation, but indoors this lens required the flash, even in a very very brightly lit room, which didn't give the greatest result. So I'd like to move on to a proper macro lens. I know I'll enjoy it, so I don't want to go through all the hassle extension tubes might cause, I'd rather get a dedicated lens.

If any of you were starting to experiment with macro, particularly insects, what lens would you recommend to a beginner with a canon 400d/40d/50d?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Canon ef-s 60mm is a cracker of a lens for cropped body, both as a macro and as a standard lens as is the ef 100 2.8 (both Is and non IS) but a bit big and quite haevy but will fit a FF camera if you ever go that way. Failing that a Canon 50 1.8 and some tubes I know you said "no tubes" but they arent that much hassle (I use them on my 85 1.8 and they give really good results) will be good and the 50 1.8 is a cracking lens in its own right if really on a tight budget.
Does depend a bit on the distance you need to be away from the insects, long zoom lenses often say "macro" they arent really macro they just focus a bit closer than a non macro zoom of the same focal length. I went on a course a while back and the guy used tubes on a long zoom, he got quite decent results. Flash needs to be off camera of course as the lens body will mask the gun, especially if its a pop-up one.
Macro photography isnt cheap if you get really serious.
Use manual focus too.
 
Last edited:
Matt - thanks for the detailed reply. I will keep an eye out for those macro lenses you mention. I already have the 50 1.8, it is really all I use, I love it (only other lenses at the mo are the 70-300 sigma and 18-55 IS kit). I hadn't really considered using it with extension tubes, have you used it with tubes before? If so, how has it compared to other macros you have used? And would you recommend any specific size of tubes to get?

Dave - thanks I'll look into that one as well. My budget would probably be up to somewhere between 200-300, would consider 2nd hand.

Would the dedicated macro lenses focus closer and produce much better results that just extension tubes on the fifty?
 
The 50mm f1.8 is indeed a cracker of a lens for the price. It doesn't focus close enough in it's own right for macro, though. The kit zoom, 18-55, focusses closer, but still of course not macro, which is technically a 1:1 or greater image.
Inherent with macro is depth of field, or rather, lack of. Stopping down to f11 will still give just millimetres DoF. And naturally, with this comes low-light issues. I'd suggest it's not the use of flash but how flash is used? On-camera isn't very good and even two, off-camera, need care and practice :)
Auto-focus is also beset with problems at macro. It tends not to be very accurate or reliable.
Have you looked at the Raynox DCR250? Not got one myself (yet!) but there's some cracking shots (search flickr) out there. As above, there's the option of cheap extension tubes. The cheapest won't allow much, if anything, in the way of metering or aperture control, though.
You might also consider tubes plus a manual dirt cheap older lens. I've used tubes with a simple adapter on one end, with a Pentacon M42 50mm. Stop-down manual metering and aperture control.
Quite a few options :)
 
hiphopopotamus said:
Matt - thanks for the detailed reply. I will keep an eye out for those macro lenses you mention. I already have the 50 1.8, it is really all I use, I love it (only other lenses at the mo are the 70-300 sigma and 18-55 IS kit). I hadn't really considered using it with extension tubes, have you used it with tubes before? If so, how has it compared to other macros you have used? And would you recommend any specific size of tubes to get?

Dave - thanks I'll look into that one as well. My budget would probably be up to somewhere between 200-300, would consider 2nd hand.

Would the dedicated macro lenses focus closer and produce much better results that just extension tubes on the fifty?
Click to expand...

Used extensions on the 50, very good results, remember the tubes take nothing away from the lens, nor do they add anything other than minimum focus distance (unlike supplementary lenses). Cant recall how close the 50 + tubes, I have a set of 3 bandit ones, so very versatile, (not those nasty cheap Chinese ones though they are to be avoided at all costs), cheaper than Canon, 3 for 1 in terms of price comparison with Canon stuff but of really good quality and they maintain all functions. However the 60mm macro is a dedicated lens configured to focus on a flat field at close distance, so it will be better than the 50 and is f2.8 instead of 1.8 but tbh at that distance you'll need as mudh dof as you can get so f16 is going to be the order of the day. At which point you're going to need lots of light.
My wife got some cracking results with tubes on her 18/55 kit lens as well but she didnt want the faff (bless her!)
For starters I would get tubes and a ring flash (or similar) and then see about a dedicated macro lens. I of course didnt do that and bought the 60 for the wife and the 100 for me, wish I'd bought a decent flash (ring) instead.
You'll sell the tubes if you want to for a good price as they dont have any glass to scratch or get dust inside :)

Matt
 
This is all great information, thanks a lot guys, very worthwhile forum!

I hadn't heard of the Raynox DCR250, looks very interesting, thanks. From the responses I guess my best bet on my budget would be a combination of some or all of the following pieces of kit:

1) Extension tubes (not a cheap set, but what price/make would you guys go for as a minimum?)
2) A ring flash (any particular make to get started? I haven't had much use for flash photography in the past so I haven't yet got a dedicated flash - do ring flashes need one?)
3) Raynox DCR250

Let me know if I'm on the right lines and, if you can, what you think a decent budget for each/all of them would be.

Thanks again.
 
The top end of your budget will get you a used Canon 100mm , lovely lens with a lot more working distance (distance from the end of the lens to subject) and easier to use than tubes and you get a nice fast, sharp prime.

Personally wouldn't bother with a ring flash - horrible light thats difficult to control - at 1:1 a normal diffused hotshoe flash is all you need.
 
Last edited:
haha, never any easy decisions in photography are there. I'll probably stay away from a ring flash for the time being and look into just the hot shoe flash & diffuser. presuming i need a flash (and from discussions on macro photography I think I probably do) it seems I have a few choices:

A) Canon 100mm macro (~£300 2nd hand) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200 depending on model) = £400-500 total

B) Canon ef 25 ii + canon ef 12 extension tubes (~£150 - if anyone knows of any decent quality non-official canon extension tubes for cheaper than this please let me know) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200) + 50mm 1.8 (already own) = £250-350 total

C) Raynox DCR250 (~£40) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200) + 50mm 1.8 (already own) = £140-240 total

D) Canon ef 25 ii + canon ef 12 extension tubes (~£150) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200) + 50mm 1.8 (already own) + Raynox DCR250 (~£40) = £290-340 total

Am I right in thinking this? And do people have any strong feelings on the best way to go? If getting the dedicated 100mm macro (option A) was out of my budget, what would be the best option?
 
Lots of choice and different people choose different kit :)
Kenko do a set of tubes that are good and a lot cheaper than Canon ones, which IMO are overpriced and I normally by Canon stuff wherever possible as I think their kit is very good but I think the rings are a bit over priced.

Flash, off camera might be a good idea you can get off camera cables that maintain all the functions of the hot shoe/flash connection (Jessop or Kerso or Flash-in-the-Pan - last two are on here sell them I believe).
Canon flashguns could be 430/580 or secondhand 420/550, 550/580 is quite good as it can trigger a second flash. Twin flash setup is going to be quite expensive though even secondhand and a bit unwieldy.
When I say ring flash I meant dedicated macro flash (in case Dogfish_magnet misunderstood - perhaps he's like to comment on a macro flash instead?)

Dogfish - I'm assuming your macro shots were taken using the "other" macro lens, name escapes me but the 5:1 ratio jobby?

Matt
 
Last edited:
hiphopopotamus said:
haha, never any easy decisions in photography are there. I'll probably stay away from a ring flash for the time being and look into just the hot shoe flash & diffuser. presuming i need a flash (and from discussions on macro photography I think I probably do) it seems I have a few choices:

A) Canon 100mm macro (~£300 2nd hand) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200 depending on model) = £400-500 total

B) Canon ef 25 ii + canon ef 12 extension tubes (~£150 - if anyone knows of any decent quality non-official canon extension tubes for cheaper than this please let me know) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200) + 50mm 1.8 (already own) = £250-350 total

C) Raynox DCR250 (~£40) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200) + 50mm 1.8 (already own) = £140-240 total

D) Canon ef 25 ii + canon ef 12 extension tubes (~£150) + hot shoe flash & diffuser (~£100-200) + 50mm 1.8 (already own) + Raynox DCR250 (~£40) = £290-340 total

Am I right in thinking this? And do people have any strong feelings on the best way to go? If getting the dedicated 100mm macro (option A) was out of my budget, what would be the best option?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't bother with the canon extension tubes.

Kenko make a set that gives you more flexibility with good build quality and full contacts so you keep aperture control and auto-focus for less than the combined price of the canon 25 and 12mm extension tubes.
 
OK, so I'm leaning towards the Kenko extension tubes for about £100... but it seems I could pick up a sigma 105mm for less than £200 2nd hand... already 2 votes for the sigma, anyone have any reasons to go for the kenkos over the dedicated lens?
 
I have both the Kenko tubes and the Sigma 105mm. I very rarely use the tubes, but find the sharpness of the Sigma comparable to my Canon L series lenses and use it all the time (not just for macro either).

Gareth
 
hiphopopotamus said:
OK, so I'm leaning towards the Kenko extension tubes for about £100... but it seems I could pick up a sigma 105mm for less than £200 2nd hand... already 2 votes for the sigma, anyone have any reasons to go for the kenkos over the dedicated lens?
Click to expand...

A dedicated lens is always a better way to go but just think of what else you will need if you are moderately serious and tune the purchases within your budget acordingly. I think a light source is important especially as it can be used for all your photography. Anyone think otherwise?

Matt
 
MatBin said:
Lots of choice and different people choose different kit :)
Snip..........
When I say ring flash I meant dedicated macro flash (in case Dogfish_magnet misunderstood - perhaps he's like to comment on a macro flash instead?)

Dogfish - I'm assuming your macro shots were taken using the "other" macro lens, name escapes me but the 5:1 ratio jobby?

Matt
Click to expand...

Matt - Personally don't like the light given by a macro ring flash such as the Canon MR-14EX or the Marumi style flashes, found it difficult to control - Yes most of my latest macro is shot using a MP-E65mm or Sigma 150mm, but there's also some with the Sigma 105, Canon 100mm and non macro 85mm with tubes.

For shots up to 1:1 you can get away with a normal diffused hotshoe flash if you are using a lens with internal focus as the lens doesn't cast a shadow, once you start getting larger magnification and shorter working distances it gets harder to get a nice soft light onto the front of the subject, with the MP-E you really need to use something like the MT-24EX - but it starts to get expensive !

hiphopopotamus said:
OK, so I'm leaning towards the Kenko extension tubes for about £100... but it seems I could pick up a sigma 105mm for less than £200 2nd hand... already 2 votes for the sigma, anyone have any reasons to go for the kenkos over the dedicated lens?
Click to expand...

Kenko tubes are great but............

When used with a 50mm lens you lose the ability to focus to infinity, have a relatively small working distance and a darker image in the viewfinder which makes accurate manual focussing more difficult.

The sigma is a very capable lens but it extends as you increase the magnification and at 1:1 it is fully extended also it has less working distance than the Canon 100mm. (122mm vs 150mm). Very little differance in sharpness between the two but personally think the Canon has nice colour rendition and better contrast.
 
Last edited:
OK - one more thing - looking through photos on the internet, very close up images of insects taken with the 105mm seem mostly to have also used extension tubes as well. Will the 105mm focus very closely (ie to capture detail of insects eyes etc), or would extension tubes need to be combined?

If so, I think it may be worth me getting the tubes and a flash first, playing with them and possibly getting the 105mm or a different macro lens in the future.....

Though I'm sure I'd like to use the 105mm for portraits as well.... this decision keeps getting harder and harder.
 
My suggestion would be for a dedicated macro lens, with a normal hotshoe flash (used off camera).
 
hiphopopotamus said:
OK - one more thing - looking through photos on the internet, very close up images of insects taken with the 105mm seem mostly to have also used extension tubes as well. Will the 105mm focus very closely (ie to capture detail of insects eyes etc), or would extension tubes need to be combined?

If so, I think it may be worth me getting the tubes and a flash first, playing with them and possibly getting the 105mm or a different macro lens in the future.....

Though I'm sure I'd like to use the 105mm for portraits as well.... this decision keeps getting harder and harder.
Click to expand...

A set of Auto extension tubes is probably the one purchase for macro you will never regret and Polaroid tubes used to be available for £60.00 from Amazon but seem to have been discontinued at the moment.

These pics show the 50mm f1.8 used with extension tubes:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157625975281497/

.
 
Craikeybaby said:
My suggestion would be for a dedicated macro lens, with a normal hotshoe flash (used off camera).
Click to expand...

For £300 all in, he's not got any of that kit yet (AIUI anyway)?

Matt
 
Matt, you are right. I think it is probably best for me to go for the set of tubes with a flash + diffuser for now on the budget I have. That way I will have a decent good option with the 50 f1.8 + tubes, and I'll also be able to try them out on my sigma 70-300 "macro" to see if that is improved in any way. Obviously it won't be anywhere near the standard of a dedicated macro prime, but I'm sure it will entertain me for a while just playing around. And I'll always have them to add to a dedicated macro prime if and when I get one.

Hope that sounds sensible, many thanks to all for the advice, your help has been much appreciated.
 
hiphopopotamus said:
Matt, you are right. I think it is probably best for me to go for the set of tubes with a flash + diffuser for now on the budget I have. That way I will have a decent good option with the 50 f1.8 + tubes, and I'll also be able to try them out on my sigma 70-300 "macro" to see if that is improved in any way. Obviously it won't be anywhere near the standard of a dedicated macro prime, but I'm sure it will entertain me for a while just playing around. And I'll always have them to add to a dedicated macro prime if and when I get one.

Hope that sounds sensible, many thanks to all for the advice, your help has been much appreciated.
Click to expand...

You could also experiment with "Lens Coupling" using your zoom lens and 50mm lens:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20926615@N05/sets/72157628714278311/

I bought my coupling ring on Ebay for approx £2.50 so it's a really cheap way to get incredible magnification.

And extension tubes on a zoom lens allow you to get very good close-ups without having to get too close and disturb your subjects:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4036839#post4036839

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4026287#post4026287

.
 
Last edited:
Wow, I'll definitely be trying some of that for an extra 2.50, thanks peter.Not sure it'll work quite as well with my sigma 70-300 as your L lens, but sure it's worth a go. How long did it take you to focus on those, and was it quite easy to use a fairly fast shutter speed once you got your flash set up correctly?
 
If you don't need the extra length of the 105mm Sigma, the 50mm F2.8 Sigma Macro lens is definately worth a look at.

If your wanting to shoot bugs, then 50mm is too short
 
andyred said:
If you don't need the extra length of the 105mm Sigma, the 50mm F2.8 Sigma Macro lens is definately worth a look at.

If your wanting to shoot bugs, then 50mm is too short
Click to expand...

I prefer the sigma 105 macro for it comfortable working distance for insects, dont have to get to close to spook them
 
twist said:
Tamron 90mm?
Click to expand...

Haven't heard of this one, anyone have any opinions of it?

andyred said:
If you don't need the extra length of the 105mm Sigma, the 50mm F2.8 Sigma Macro lens is definately worth a look at.

If your wanting to shoot bugs, then 50mm is too short
Click to expand...

I'm mainly doing macro for bugs, so probably will need the extra length. thanks for the suggestion though
 
Sounds like loads to me, but then I used a reversed 28mm and that had working distance of a lot less lol.
 
I've got a 100 2.8 L IS macro, a Marumi ring flash which cost £95 off ebay and works really well with it and a set of Kenko AF tubes. Obviously on your budget you wont be able to get the 100 L but you might get a non L version which has really good optics anyway. With a set of tubes you are able to get some very close macro shots and the ring flash can be taken off the lens and used as off camera if necessary. Here's a couple I've got with my 100 L SOOC only cropped and resized and both were taken hand held on AV priority.

6163724908_db7ab774b2_z.jpg
[/url][/IMG]

6163685840_b718cd263b_z.jpg
[/url][/IMG]
 
Last edited:
those photos are great, exactly ones I'd like to be able to take. I will definitely be getting some kenko tubes as a first, a flash shortly after, and then I will go from there I think.

This thread has been invaluable, thanks a lot for all the input
 
hiphopopotamus said:
Wow, I'll definitely be trying some of that for an extra 2.50, thanks peter.Not sure it'll work quite as well with my sigma 70-300 as your L lens, but sure it's worth a go. How long did it take you to focus on those, and was it quite easy to use a fairly fast shutter speed once you got your flash set up correctly?
Click to expand...

Focusing was the greatest difficulty with a DOF of only 1/10mm or thereabouts as you can probably imagine.

Even the slightest "creep" on my tripod was enough to alter the focus - it really was a case of trial and error - and a lot of throways.

I used 2 flashes one on my camera which was bounced as I was within 1-1 1/2 inches of the subjects and a slave flash, optically triggered, which I held about 1 - 11/2 feet away.

The ISO figure was 200 (I think) and the exposure was 1/250 sec at ranges between f11-f32.

The maximum shutter speed was dictated by the flash which on my camera was 1/250 sec.

Hope that helps a bit.

I have also just got a macro focusing rail to make focusing easier in such circumstances.

.
 
A macro focusing rail? jesus. i wonder how long it will be before i decide i need that too. if it carries on at this rate i will be eating the insects I am taking photos of as my only means of sustenance.

Thanks for the explanation. I've huge respect for the patience and forethought that went into those photos, they are well worth it. Post more if and when you get some more good ones.
 
hiphopopotamus said:
A macro focusing rail? jesus. i wonder how long it will be before i decide i need that too. if it carries on at this rate i will be eating the insects I am taking photos of as my only means of sustenance.

Thanks for the explanation. I've huge respect for the patience and forethought that went into those photos, they are well worth it. Post more if and when you get some more good ones.
Click to expand...

Well I bought a Fotomate Macro focusing rail similar to this for £9.99:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2-way-mac...63?pt=UK_Tripods_Monopods&hash=item1c1d48eb9f

It took a few weeks to arrive as they are situated in China.

I haven't tried it yet but will in the next few days.

.
 
Cheapest option? Sellotape your 50 1.8 reversed onto the 70-300...or splash out a few quid on an adapter ring.
 
Just picked up a set of Polaroid AF DG extension tubes from amazon for £60, hopefully they will be as good as the kenko set (which are now on amazon for £150)?

Just need to sort out a decent flash + diffuser now to hopefully get myself underway... any cheap recommendations welcome!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top