Thinking of Going Macro

J

jpwild

Messages
750
Edit My Images
No
I have a 450D and perhaps going to a full frame in 2-18 months.

I'm thinking of branching out a bit and try some macro photography indoors and outdoors. Just wondering what decent kit there is for this?

Nothing too pricey but obviously decent.

Looking at Canon, Tamron and Sigma lens and there is a massive choice out there. Could it be worth getting extension tube for my 70/200 F4 L?
If I was shooting indoors such as bugs, coins and random objects I assume I'd need a macro flash? Not the speedlite series of flashes?
 
Tubes are a good way of getting decent results reasonably cheap. Make sure you get a set of full auto ones - the manual ones are much cheaper (about £10 rather than about £80) but they loss of easy control over the aperture is a right pain in the arse. The Kenko tubes are good and a hell of a lot cheaper than Canon. Get them off ebay - you can pick them up for £80-90 on there - Jessops, WEX etc charge well over £100.

As far as lenses go, I think the general consensus is that the lenses around the 100mm range give the best balance of working distance and ease of use for hand-held work. Your options in this range are basically the Canon 100mm (I use this and love it), the Sigma 105mm, the Tamron 90mm and also the Canon 100mm L. All are known for their excellent image quality. The Canon perhaps has a slight edge over the Sigma and Tamron in IQ - it also focuses internally so there's no change in length as your focusing, which can be handy.

If you want to go really extreme, there's the MPE-65 which is the lens that offer a range of magnifications from 1x-5x.

If you do buy a set of tubes and then decide you want a dedicated lens, it's worth keeping hold of the tubes as, combined with a true macro lens,they'll give you a magnification of up to about 2x and it's always nice to be able to get closer :D

Flash; Something like the MT-24ex is obviously the ideal, but an single Speedlite is a very capable solution if budget is tight. I use a YN-465 for all my macro stuff at the moment, basically because I can't afford anything better :'( It's worth playing with getting it off camera, and with different ways of diffusing the light, but the results you can get aren't bad :thumbs:
 
All macro lenses are very good optically. They're not hard to make.

Flash makes life a heck of a lot easier, ring-flash especially.

I use tubes on my 70-200L and that's a very good combo for me. Decent quality, and the zoom adds a lot of versatility.

For some cheap fun, and also a level of quality that might surprise you, try the Raynox DCR-250 macro adapter for under £40 http://www.amazon.co.uk/RAYNOX-RADCR-0250-Raynox-DCR-250/dp/B000A1SZ2Y Pics here http://www.flickr.com/groups/raynoxdcr250/

You mention coins. Flat subjects, with important detail near the edges of the frame will test anything less than a real macro lens for sharpness.
 
On crop, 100mm macro is perfect. On FF is it a bit too short, and there is a reason for 180mm L macro (which I personally don't like and can't justify).

70-200mm maybe worth a go if you are not doing much, and I heard is best at around 160mm with the tube. It is a bit more fiddly, and 100mm macro is a nice lens to have.
 
Purchased a 100mm Canon macro lens a short while ago. Wonderful lens for both macro and as a general purpose portrait lens as well. Just need to get myself a flash now.

Looking at possibly getting one of these flashes Linky
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top