macro???

[rom4n301]

well ive been debating for a while whether i should get a macro lens or not. i was going choosing between an ef 50mm 1.8 or the ef 50mm 2.8 macro.. i dont quite understand how a macro works.. can u still focus to infinity with it?? it be cool if some one could explain the diff. between the two lenses besides the fact that u can focus closer with the macro and the apeture diffs.

 

[Josh66]

can u still focus to infinity with it??

Yes.

One down side here would be that it's slower than the other 50mm primes.
It might be a little slower to autofocus too. My 100mm macro is pretty slow on autofocusing unless it's already kinda close to where it needs to be (then it's lightning fast).

 

[rom4n301]

yea.. well iunno if i should get macro im still savin up for the f/4 70-200 l
but after i get that.. i def wanna a 50mm prime but don kno if i should get macro

 

[Do'Urden's Eyes]

the 50mm F1.8 wont work too well as a macro lens as it doesnt not magnify to a 1:1 ratio. Meaning it will not project your subjects onto the sensor the SAME size they actually are. the 50mm F2.8 i think will because its a macro lens, im not sure about that so look it up. the 60mm F2.8 definately does though.

One thing to keep in mind with these lenses is that the longer focal length lenses (100mm, 150mm, 180mm) still designated as MACRO will increase the distance between the front element of the lens and the subject. so (hypothetical numbers) the 60mm will let you get to a 1:1 magnification at about .25 feet, where as the 100mm will get you that magnification at .31 feet, and the 180mm will get you there at a distance of 1 foot.

Purely made up numbers but it should demonstrate my point.

Hope that helps a bit.

 

[Overread]

First off here is a good read on macro photography and on lenses - it also has the working distance (distance from camera to subject) for the different focal lengths:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/fauna_macro_photography.htm

The best bets for a cheaper budget macro are the Canon EFs 60mm macro and the sigma 70mm macro I think. Both are true macro lenses (ie 1:1 macro), both are well made and very sharp (70mm is regarded as sigmas sharpest lens). The only downside to the EFs 60mm is that it will only work on a crop sensor camera, so if you upgrade to something like a 5D you won't be able to use that lens.
Aside from that the only downside of both lenses is their reduced working distance - which can make things a little trickier when starting out getting close to insects. I would genearlly recomend looking at something like a 100mm macro or greater, but then they are going to cost you a bit more.
It all depends:
Also here is a good blog to read regarding macro work from a very talented macro shooter:
http://nocroppingzone.blogspot.com/
interestingly he does not belive that there is such a problem with working distance and that its more about finding the right subject who will let you photograph it.

 

[rom4n301]

thanks everyone.. ima check out the websites

 

[Do'Urden's Eyes]

Overread, the difference in price of the canon EF-S 60mm macro and the EF 100mm macro is basically nil here in canada. theyre the same price. and the sigma 150mm you have i dont think goes much higher in price either. the only REALLY costly long focal length macro is the 180mm L and thats because its an L, professional grade.

 

[Overread]

ahh right thanks for that

The only downside to the 100mm macro is that you have to get the lens hood (essentail) and tripod collar (almost essentail) separatly as canon don't sell them with the lens - that (least over here) pushes the 100mm macro into the same price area as the 150mm sigma macro.

 

[Romphotog]

well ive been debating for a while whether i should get a macro lens or not.

yes, you should. I've found that half of what's interesting to photograph is small, requiring a macro lens. Even if not shooting bugs or flowers, the dof is cool.

 

[Josh66]

I would definately get a macro lens. Even if you decide that you don't like macro later on, you can still use the lens like any other lens.

 

[benhasajeep]

Don't forget about extension tubes. I bought my wife a Kenko set for her D50 and 105 macro (no glass so no optics to worry about). Works great when you want to increase the magnification. They are good with normal lenses too. So with some extension tube and the 50mm it would be a little better in either not having to get so close, or getting higher magnification. I bought the automatic tubes (allows metering and af) the price was pretty cheap compared to buying a bigger lens.

 

[Overread]

Extensions tubes are a good idea - and as Ben said they contain no optics, so you can avoid the branded ones and get cheaper makes (kenko are popular) without problems (and considering that one canon extension tube can cost as much as a 3 set of kenko its worth the saving!)
You should note that if you use tubes on a lens you will lose your infinity focus (ie you can't focus on far off subjects) whilst not a problem with macro it can be a problem if your just out and about grabbing sights at they come