#1  
Old 04-10-2010, 01:16 PM
solissydney (Ken)
Registered User

solissydney is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Castle Hill Sydney
Posts: 660
Long Lens versus Macro

Hi.
What really is the difference between say for instance, a 300mm lens and a Macro
Much difference?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-10-2010, 01:44 PM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,159
A macro lens is designed to allow you to get up close and personal to your subject, whereas a 300mm lens may have a minimum focusing distance of say, 1.5 metres.

H
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-10-2010, 06:38 PM
Dennis
Dazzled by the Cosmos.

Dennis is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 11,704
Hi Ken

Some write that a “true” Macro Lens is one that produces a magnification of 1:1 at its closest focusing distance. That is, if an insect is say 8mm long, then when photographed at the closest point that the lens will focus, the “image” of the insect on your sensor will be 8mm long too (or on film in the olden days).

Typically, a 1:1 Macro Lens will allow you to focus as close as between 10cms – 20cms from the front lens element, slightly longer if we measure the distance to the sensor.

At a guess, a 300mm F4 lens would have a closest focus of say, 150 to 200 cms and a (de-)magnification of say, 1:4. That is, the same 8mm insect when photographed at a distance of 150cms would only appear as 2mm long on your sensor, or a ¼ of the life size.

Cheers

Dennis
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-10-2010, 08:03 PM
leon's Avatar
leon
Registered User

leon is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Warrnambool
Posts: 12,430
Well guys the best way to go is a Canon EF 180mm F3.5L Macro USM.

Telephoto macro lens with a maximum magnification of 1x. Life-size close-ups can be taken from a farther distance without disturbing the subject (insects, etc.). The internal floating system minimizes fluctuations in aberrations caused by changes in the focusing distance. The delineation is therefore razor-sharp from 1x to infinity.

Spot on

I have one and man it is beautiful

Leon
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-10-2010, 08:45 PM
rally
Registered User

rally is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 896
A 300mm lens can also be a macro lens !

The two terms (300mm lens and macro lens) are not mutually exclusive.

Adding to Dennis' comment - a true macro lens is supposed to have at least a 1:1 subject to image size ratio.
However it can be greater and in some cases lens manufacturers will label a lens "macro" even if it doesnt quite meet that criteria.

Generally a macro lens will have the ability to have a very short focus distance, which therefore increases the size of the subject on the image plane irrespective of focal length.
So some lenses are labelled "macro" because of that feature.

You can take macro photographs with all sorts of different focal length lenses.

Sometimes its good to be able to get within mm's of your subjects and create interesting perspective macro shots, other times you need a long focal length lens to get even close to insects on the move - eg dragonflys and butterflies.

Some of my favourite shots (of insects) were taken with a 400mm effective focal length lens. Its a 50-200mm zoom with 2x crop factor (4/3rds format CCD).

Sometimes I add a Canon 500d macro lens to the front of this lens (not to be confused with a camera - its a doublet) or a MCON35 Olympus macro adapter, and 1.4x adapter and that allows me to get a lot closer to the subject

Yet other shots have been taken with a rectilinear 7mm lens or a 35mm lens with 2x adapter and twin macro flash for getting really, really close to bugs.
You have to watch the front element doesnt actually touch them.

By changing focal lengths you also change your depth of field - so a short focal length lens will have a hyperfocal distance which is very short, meaning the bug and everything behind it are in focus, whereas trying that with a longer focal length lens and you might find the bugs eyes are in focus and the rest of him forward and back are out of focus - that is the advantage of using a macro flash and a tiny small aperture

So you lens choice can really change dramatically depending on the type of macro photography you wish to do and what sort of lighting you have.
eg if your macro is coin faces or polished rock faces you dont need much depth of field - however if you want a full frontal of moth with long antennae and you want most of him in focus back to his wings and tail - you're in trouble !

Sorry to complicate the matter !

Rally

Last edited by rally; 04-10-2010 at 08:49 PM. Reason: typos + added last para
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-10-2010, 09:15 PM
dpastern (Dave Pastern)
PI cult member

dpastern is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,874
I'll chip in with my 2.2c inc. GST worth - long lenses and dedicated macro lenses both have their pros and cons. Long lenses can be great for butterflies and dragonflies. Macro lenses, as others have said, generally give 1:1 at their closest focus. Working distance will change depending on the focal length of the macro lens, so a 180mm one vs a 100mm one will give you more room for those difficult to approach insects. Likewise, a 50mm lens + tubes (shame on you guys for forgetting this valuable option) will generally give you greater than 1:1 but at lesser working distances. Of course, then there's the famed Canon EOS MPE-65 which will not focus to infinity, but will offer between 1x and 5x magnification. I prefer a combination of lenses, from telephotos to 1:1 macros, to 50mm/tubes to the yet to purchase MPE-65. I've done a bit of work with high mag shots (50mm + tubes + 1.4x tc + 2x tc stacked) over the past year, so I'm gradually getting used to higher shots. For a fair while, I used the 50mm/tubes/1.4x tc.

One important other thing - and Rally tuoched on this - know what subject you're shooting. There's not much general point trying to approach a nervous insect such as a dragonfly with a 50mm/tubes combo as a rule.

I have extensive experience shooting macro, since it's my primary genre (8 or 9 years now).

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-10-2010, 09:46 PM
Vanda's Avatar
Vanda (Ian)
Registered User

Vanda is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Perth
Posts: 189
I recently got the 150mm Sigma macro. Nice lens and reasonably fast at F2.8. Sharpest images (and most macro lenses have a sweet spot) in the range F8 to F16. This sits on top of my Nikon D90. I have also seen some fantastic shots with the Canon 5D and 180mm macro lense. These lenses keep you a good distance for insect shots.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-10-2010, 11:39 PM
dpastern (Dave Pastern)
PI cult member

dpastern is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanda View Post
I recently got the 150mm Sigma macro. Nice lens and reasonably fast at F2.8. Sharpest images (and most macro lenses have a sweet spot) in the range F8 to F16. This sits on top of my Nikon D90. I have also seen some fantastic shots with the Canon 5D and 180mm macro lense. These lenses keep you a good distance for insect shots.
The Sigma 150mm is very nice - almost as good as the Canon 180mm f3.5 L to be honest. The latter has slightly better bokeh, but that's about it. I actually own the Sigma btw (except on a Canon body). From my experience, f11 is the sweetspot with this lens, although it's very sharp from f5.6 up to f14 or so.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-10-2010, 12:08 AM
Steffen's Avatar
Steffen
Ebotec Alpeht Sicamb

Steffen is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toongabbie, NSW
Posts: 1,965
It is difficult to design lenses that perform well and have a flat field at focus distances of both infinity and close up (10 x focal length or closer). Telephoto lenses are designed to perform at their best when focussed at infinity. In order to achieve 1:1 magnification one would have to get as close as 4 x focal length (sensor to subject). Most telephoto lenses won't focus that close and none perform very well at their closest possible focus.

Conversely, most macro lenses don't perform as well at infinity focus as non macro lenses. There are expensive exceptions of course that go a long way toward crossing the divide…

Cheers
Steffen.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 06:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement