# Macro Lens & Camera Questions.



## Mr.Mantid (Mar 28, 2011)

There are quite a few excellent macro-photographers on this forum that leave me in awe of their ability to capture such breath taking pictures. I know not much of photography but upon viewing such awesome photos, I wish to get into macro-photography. I'd like to learn a bit more about cameras and lens before I make an expensive purchase; I am hoping I can get some help.

From what I understand, the bigger the lens in milimeters, the longer the depth of field (better focus on pics)? I'm looking at cannon lens and it looks like the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM and EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM are the better lens out there.

My question is, If I want to get the best focus on a small object should I go with either of these lens or am I misunderstanding how this stuff works? I understand that sometimes only part of the subject may be in focus so a focus stacking software must be used?

For the camera, I'm looking at a EOS 5D Mark II with EF 24-105IS mainly for its HD video capabilities and its high amount of megapixels.

Maybe a more appropriate question would be, What type of cannon camera and lens should I get? Looking for something with good HD video capabilites and very good focus.

Thanks,

Mr. Mantid


----------



## sporeworld (Mar 28, 2011)

I am (sadly) NOT one of the macro photographers here, but I AM the proud owner of a 5D Mark 2, which I love, love, love!

Eager to see what new recomendations the experts have to offer...


----------



## more_rayne (Mar 28, 2011)

The aperture (f-stop) controls how much is in focus, not the focal length of the lens (mm). The 100mm is easier to use than the longer 180mm. I have the older 100mm, cheaper but still amazing for macro work. IS is not really important when doing macros and you will be manually focusing. But if you intend to use the 100mm as a regular lens, then IS is great. The 5D is fantastic, but if your main purpose is macro, 7D will give you more "magnification" because of it's crop sensor. If you're bitten by the macro bug, you'll eventually want to get the mp-e 65 lens.


----------



## twolfe (Mar 28, 2011)

Over the past 4 months since I got started with this hobby, I've only photographed my mantids 4 - 5 times. So, I'm not an expert, though I have photographed a lot of butterflies and some moths.

I have the 100 mm IS Canon macro lens. It's a nice lens. The 180 allows you to photograph without needing to get as close. It's probably better for butterflies, etc. that aren't a staged shoot. A friend of mine has one, and I tried it. I would start with one of the 100mm macro lenses. You'll want to consider getting a macro flash, too.

I was originally using the 1D Mark IV for photographing my mantids and got decent results. But the full frame 5D Mark II is much better even though it doesn't have the crop factor.

I love the quality of the 5D Mark II and am looking forward to using it for landscapes on an upcoming trip. For moving wildlife, it drives me crazy though as I'm so used to having all of the focus points and the 10 frames a second on the 1D Mark IV. I haven't used the video on the 5D yet but haven't been that impressed with the 1D Mark III and IV. It's been a long time since I used a camcorder but found them much easier to use for video. Perhaps Precarious can advise you on that.

Here's a link to some of my photos if you are interested:

My mantid photos My link

And my butterflies My link


----------



## animalexplorer (Mar 28, 2011)

Aperature controls the DOF(Depth of Field) the width of the focal plane. B)


----------



## Slinkytreekreeper (Mar 28, 2011)

Hey Mr Mantid, 5D Mk2 is a perfect choice in my opinion for macro - what you lose in magnification you more than well make up for in sensor size/light needed. It's totally noise free at lower iso levels and double the resolution of a smaller body means you can crop and still get crisper images than a smaller sensor. The only reasons not to go for this body is if you need really fast images in succession or full on water sealing like the EOS range. You will need a beast of a computer to edit the footage though

It doesn't have a flash but you will need at the very least a speedlite and basic flash bracket. The dual flash units from canon gives you far more options and flexibility than a ring flash does, even a really good one. If you want a non tripod rig then it's essential, if you want to take pics of moving subjects - it's essential.

The non IS 100mm macro is an awesome lens for the money and does not change length when zooming - really useful. The 180mm is a very nice lens indeed but it's even harder to handhold shots due to the long working distance and it's a lot of money extra if you don't need that working distance.

The only other thing is make sure you know what sort of magnifications you want to take pics of, both the lenses above get to 1:1 ratio - the image is the same size on the sensor as in real life. If you want closer, the MPE-65mm (upto 5:1) is the only choice where top quality and DOF is wanted.

5D mark2, Canon dual flash, 100mm macro and an MPE would be beyond any macro shooters wishes for a starting rig but if you can afford it, I really don't see how the money could be better spent. You could easily spend a lot less depending on what exactly is important for you. The biggest problems I have found are getting enough light at high magnifications and producing a noise free background.

Hope that helps some


----------



## Mr.Mantid (Mar 28, 2011)

Slinkytreekreeper said:


> Hey Mr Mantid, 5D Mk2 is a perfect choice in my opinion for macro - what you lose in magnification you more than well make up for in sensor size/light needed. It's totally noise free at lower iso levels and double the resolution of a smaller body means you can crop and still get crisper images than a smaller sensor. The only reasons not to go for this body is if you need really fast images in succession or full on water sealing like the EOS range. You will need a beast of a computer to edit the footage though
> 
> It doesn't have a flash but you will need at the very least a speedlite and basic flash bracket. The dual flash units from canon gives you far more options and flexibility than a ring flash does, even a really good one. If you want a non tripod rig then it's essential, if you want to take pics of moving subjects - it's essential.
> 
> ...


You pretty much answered all my questions.. Thanks. Right now money IS an issue (lol) but right now I want do my homework so that when I am more financially stable I can go on a phography spending spree.

Thanks everyone for your help,

Cheers,

Mr.Mantid


----------



## patrickfraser (Mar 28, 2011)

CHA-CHING! Wow! I didn't know how expensive photo equipment was. I thought I splurged on a new Nikon S80. Hey! It's what Ashton Kutcher uses, right? I doubt it, but he got me to buy it. I guess my $300 point and shoot will have to do for now. At least it is better than my last, more expensive camera.


----------



## Slinkytreekreeper (Mar 28, 2011)

There ain't nothing wrong with a POS, just depends what you plan to do with it and how much of a control freak you are  . I'm blown away every day by talented photographers with a lot less than I have to play with.


----------



## sporeworld (Mar 28, 2011)

I still haven't gotten a decent macro lens, but the ability to shoot video through WHATEVER lens you have is amazing! There's a frustration limit to the length of the video (I think 12 minutes, or some such), which makes it impractical for some projects, without some tweaking. I've done some work with the software to take the pictures from the PC wire to the camera, but I'm WAY novice.


----------

