Macro Lenses

Adamneedsadvice · May 12, 2011

I am basically completely new to photography, and I'd like to invest in some better lenses so I am hoping you all can help point me in the right direction.

I have beginners dslr - canon rebel t2i (poor college student) It came with a couple kit lenses, a EF-S 18-55 IS and a EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III

I am mainly interested in artistic work, especially macro.

Ive been looking at different lenses but honestly I dont know where to begin...

I was looking at canons MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x, EF 100mmf/2.8 EF 100mm f/2.8L , EF 180mm f/3.5L

Obviously Id like sharp picture quality, but how comparable are the picture qualities of these lenses to one another? (100mmf/2.8 / 2.8L) large price difference... etc. The MP-E 65mm offers the greatest magnification?? 180mm is mainly for gaining that extra distance from the subject??

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

bazooka · May 12, 2011

I only have experience with the 100mm 2.8 USM (I own it) and it is one sweet piece of glass. It's a nice macro lens, but also a nice portrait lens if you get into that. The MP-E doesn't have auto-focus so that makes it less versatile. The longer focal length allows you to stay further from the scene/subject which benefits two ways. First, you avoid disturbing the subject, particularly if it's living, and you also avoid blocking light to it (creating shadows on the scene). As far as the L macro's, I don't know anything about them.

Zev Steinhardt · May 12, 2011

I have both the 100mm (non-L) lens and the MP-E 65mm

The 100mm lens is a great lens. I get wonderful photos from it. Furthermore, it can also be used as a portrait lens.

The MP-E 65 will let you get thisclose to your subjects. It's a dedicated macro lens. It will also magnify your images up to 5x (unlike the 100mm which only goes to 1:1)

However, there are a few things you need to know about the MP-E65:

1. It's a dedicated macro lens -- you can't use it for anything else other than macro
2. It's manual focus (as opposed to the 100mm which is manual and auto)
3. If you're going to use it at higher magnifications, you MUST provide additional light. The magnification eats up light.
4. The lens has a steep learning curve. I've been fooling around with it for a few months and have yet to really master it.

I'll follow this post up with some shots that I took with each lens.

Zev Steinhardt

Zev Steinhardt · May 12, 2011

100mm macro lens photos:

MP-E 65mm (keep in mind that I'm still learning this lens and that it's MUCH more difficult to use than the 100mm)

Zev Steinhardt

Overread · May 12, 2011

A prime (one focal length) macro lens from pretty much any modern lens manufacturer is good - really good - optically speaking. In fact there is little real world difference between them and any differences would only really show up in controlled test shots in studio conditions - out in the field the marginal difference are not worth worrying about.

As a result you can choose a macro lens based on your needs, requirements and budget without too much worry for its optical quality.

The typical advice for someone starting out with an eye to shooting insects is to choose a lens of 90mm focal length or longer. Now since all the true macro lenses get the same magnification of 1:1 (size of image reflected on sensor : size of subject in real life) the image you get from a 35mm macro to a 180mm macro at 1:1 (closest focusing distance) is identical (save for minor differences from manufacture). The difference is the range from the front of the lens to the subject (called working distance - not to be confused with minimum focusing distance which is from the sensor/film to the subject).
The 90mm or longer ranges give an easier starting focal length for insects and lighting - shorter lenses can indeed work well for these subjects, but are harder to use as you have to get closer (more chance to spook subject) and lighting can also become more tricky.

For a good insect macro lens you can consider:
Tamron 90mm macro
Tokina 105mm macro (for some reason an unpopular lens though I've never heard anything bad about it specifically - its just not popular)
Sigma 105mm macro
Canon 100mm macro
Canon 100mm L IS macro (sports probably the fastest AF of any macro lens for canon - also has weathersealing - optically it has little advantage over its regular version. IS is the big gain here which is a hybrid IS to help at closer focusing distance of macro work).
Sigma 150mm macro
Sigma 180mm macro (very similar to the 150mm in spec and performance - save for being 30mm longer in focal length. It is now out of production though during its release was always more popular than the canon 180mm for its lighter build and cheaper price - second hand or old stock is worth considering).
Canon 180mm L macro
Tamron 180mm macro (another unpopular lens, but again with nothing specifically bad to mention).

If you are not going to do insects to any great level you also have these lenses that you can consider:
Canon EFS 60mm macro (crop sensor fit only)
Tamron 60mm macro (crop sensor only)
Sigma 70mm macro (fullframe compatable - also fits sigma's teleconverters as well even though its not listed on their site)
Sigma 50mm macro (oft reported to be a little cheap in its build quality - but a solid choice)
Canon 50mm macro (note this is not a true macro lens and only gets a 1:2 magnification (half life size) unless you also purchase its lifesize adaptor - note whilst a good optical setup its price is higher when both parts are bought than other options)

Shorter working distances are about their only weakness in the above group - otherwise they are all optically strong and light lenses.

Macro lenses not recommended to the beginner:
Tokina 35mm macro - this lens has an insanely small working distance which makes focusing tricky, but lighting even harder. A good lens overall, but not a good starting lens for 1:1 macro work (is also probably the most rarely used of all the macro lenses)
Canon MPE 65mm macro - unique in its ability to "zoom" from 1:1 to 5:1 magnification; a great macro lens, but not for starters. Its magnification and working distance make shooting very difficult and lighting is its own challenge as well. In addition it won't focus on anything further away than around 6cm from the lens (ie at 1:1). Thus even within macro groups its a rare lens and also a support macro lens (many insects and other subjects needing a weaker magnification than 1:1 at times). It is also one of the hardest lenses to use - let alone learn to use well. Rewards can be great, but the challenge is also great.

chaosrealm93 · May 12, 2011

@ Zev Steinhardt, love the second one ^^

Adamneedsadvice · May 12, 2011

Thanks for the information, very helpful!

Here is a close up photo I took of a flower with the 18-55mm kit lense... http://www.flickr.com/photos/57819049@N08/5713858971/ (not sure how to attach an image, linking didnt seem to work?)

Hoping / assuming a new lens will help aid in better work?

The photo Zev Steinhardt took of the water droplet, would that be achievable with the 100mm lens? Similarly, I suppose photos that photos which are close BUT NOT extreme close ups would not be possible with the MPE lens?

Overread · May 12, 2011

Adamneedsadvice said:
The photo Zev Steinhardt took of the water droplet, would that be achievable with the 100mm lens?

Depends how big your waterdrop is. For an idea of the difference between close up (around 1:2) and the true macro here is a 1:1 macro shot of a hoverfly

and here is a 1:2 shot of a hoverfly:

(note only rough measurements here nothing exact).
waterdrops should indeed be possible, though I've never had any luck with them (darn tricky reflective surface)

Adamneedsadvice said:
Similarly, I suppose photos that photos which are close BUT NOT extreme close ups would not be possible with the MPE lens?

The MPE starts at 1:1 and goes to 5:1 - the 1:1 shot above of the hoverfly would be the biggest possible type of shot it could get, it could not get the 1:2 shot at all (its simply impossible with the lens all it will do is show total blur). This is why its a more specialist macro lens and even within macro groups its a more rare lens in use.

j-digg · May 12, 2011

Adamneedsadvice said:
The photo Zev Steinhardt took of the water droplet, would that be achievable with the 100mm lens?

I took this one with my 100L, inverted of course to show the diffracted image rightside up... not as close as Zev's drop, but I dont think I was quite at 1:1 either:

Derrel · May 12, 2011

Skip the 100/2.8-L macro...it doesn't offer much added utility over the 100/2.8 EF USM model. An excellent FLASH set-up will be possible to buy with the price difference between the regular 100 and the 100mm-L series. And you WILL want and need a good electronic flash setup if you do any macro, sooner, rather than later. If I had my choice of macro lenses, it would be a 180mm model. I currently have several macro lenses, ranging from 55mm to 180mm, and the one I find myself reaching for the most often is the 180mm Sigma EX f/3.5 HSM, because of the focal length, the working distance that gives, and the narrow angle of view behind the subject. I personally find macro lenses in the short focal lengths of 50,55,60mm to be ridiculously limiting in terms of how absolutely right on top of subjects the lens is...so close that it is often challenging to get light onto the subject, OR impossible not to scare the subject away.

I can confidently state that you would not enjoy the MP-E macro lens as your first macro lens...it's a specialist tool.

Dao · May 12, 2011

Hoverfly shot taken with older non-USM Canon 100mm macro lens at 1:1 ratio.
As mentioned above, most of the macro lens are quite good in terms of optical quality. As for focal length, I will start from 90mm or above.

Zev Steinhardt · May 12, 2011

Thank you chaosrealm93

Zev Steinhardt

Zev Steinhardt · May 12, 2011

j-digg said:
Adamneedsadvice said:

The photo Zev Steinhardt took of the water droplet, would that be achievable with the 100mm lens?

Click to expand...

I took this one with my 100L, inverted of course to show the diffracted image rightside up... not as close as Zev's drop, but I dont think I was quite at 1:1 either:

That's a FABULOUS shot. I love that!!

Zev Steinhardt

Zev Steinhardt · May 12, 2011

Derrel said:
I can confidently state that you would not enjoy the MP-E macro lens as your first macro lens...it's a specialist tool.

What Derrel said. I've been shooting macro for a while now with the 100mm and been getting great results. The only reason I went with the MP-E65mm was because I wanted to get in closer than the 100mm allowed. But like I said, it's got a steep learning curve. If I started out with that lens, I very well might have gotten frustrated with the subject and just moved on.

Zev Steinhardt