Using a Canon 135mm F2 L lens for macro...

futureal33

futureal33

Messages
2,390
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I own a 135L f2 lens, and love it to bits.
However, I find sometimes that its MFD is too far for some shots, and I resort top cropping in post.

I have considered getting the 100mm L IS macro lens, I enjoy doing macro work (not true 1:1 stuff, but just close-up photography of flowers, insects, and even portraits being able to get in nice and tight)

Obviously the 100mm L is going to set me back £600... whereas I could get some extension tubes for the 135L and probably get similar results..

Well that is the question, does anyone here use the 135L for macro shots, and if so, could you post up your opinion of using it this way?

Thank you
 
For close up photography of flowers etc you'll be looking at a 12mm extension tube to do the job, and a 25 if you wanted to get in closer say to photograph a closer image of a phone etc.

It's a pity I got rid of my 12mm, I'd have let you have it for the price of postage.
 
Would a 12mm tube be enough to get in close enough for shots like these:

article-1198802-05A2CAF5000005DC-500_468x389.jpg


blue_flower_wallpaper.jpg


As thats about as close as I am trying to get.
 
I've got a 135L and some tubes, plus a 100L. Give me a tick and I'll post up some comparative examples. Mind you, the light has gone now so don't expect pretty pictures - I'll just demonstrate the magnification factor. Back in a bit.
 
Last edited:
Here's my 5D2 and 100L macro at MFD, confirming that I've just perfectly squeezed 36mm of size onto the width of my sensor, giving 1:1 magnification....

20120313_171057_1385_LR.jpg



Here's the 135 with 12mm of tubes, squeezing 121mm of stuff onto my 36mm sensor, so that's around 1:3.4 ratio and means you could fill the full frame sensor with anything 12cm or larger....

20120313_170627_1381_LR.jpg



Here's the 135 with 20mm of tubes, squeezing 101mm of stuff onto my 36mm sensor, so that's around 1:3 ratio and means you could fill the sensor with anything 10cm or larger....

20120313_170730_1382_LR.jpg



135 + 36mm of tubes....

20120313_170829_1383_LR.jpg


135 + 68mm of tubes (all of them stacked)....

20120313_170924_1384_LR.jpg


Sorry about the lighting. I don't have a macro lighting setup so it was just a 580EX dumped on the hotshoe.
 
Tim, those shots are fantastic, thank you :)

How is the DoF affected with the 135L + extension tubes? For instance, is the depth of field the same (or thereabouts) when you have all the tubes stacked on the 135mm as with the 100mm at MFD?

As someone who owns both, what is your opinion of them side by side?

ps - thanks again for those fantastic shots :)
 
Despite having the macro lens I'm really not a macro shooter. The 135 is sharper and better suited to getting creamy backgrounds for portraiture, or fast sports, both of which are more my thing. The tubes I've had for years, originally to turn my nifty into a cheap macro solution and until just now I have never used the 135 for a macro shoot. With the 100L in my armoury there hasn't been much point.

As for DOF comparisons, I haven't got a clue, but since I think it's tightly integrated with magnification factor the simple truth is that the more you magnify the subject the less DOF you will have, regardless of how you do it. e.g. a 100mm lens used at 100cm and f/2.8 will yield the same DOF as a 135mm lens used at 135cm and f/2.8. Both will project equal sized images onto the sensor and the DOF will be the same for both scenarios. If you increase focal length but maintain distance, thus increasing magnification, your DOF decreases. Equally if you maintain focal length but shorten the distance your DOF decreases, again giving you greater magnification. No free lunches here. :D
 
Tim, do you have any real life examples from the 100L?

I know the 100L would suit my needs better, but Im tempted to try the tubes to see how long the macro bug (pun intended) lasts.
This all stemmed from getting this shot in my garden, and realising I couldn't get as close as I wanted with the 135L


Ladybirds by futureal33, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top