Another reason to shoot Canon

[kamakiri]

Crud...now I gotta spend more on lenses than mantises:

Canon 100mm IS info

People are turning out great samples shot at f/22 or F/16 and in the 1/4 second range! I already love IS, but this is where I wanted it the most

A little bit old news in the Canon circles...but I thought this might interest some of the shooters here.

 

[idolomantis]

Looks like a great lens aswell.

I'm saving up for another one but there's so much choise

 

[yeatzee]

Considering you have the MPE-65, if I were in your situation I would buy the closest I could get to a 200mm macro not a 100mm, despite its "L" marking.

(SR, which is pentax's version of IS, is in body and Its awesome I must say. Though for macro shots as you know the shutter speed has to be pretty decent. At least 1/150' unless you have super human steadiness B) .)

Edit: I still think they didn't need a whole new macro lens to give the "L" marking. Their regular 100mm macro is and has been definitely good enough for it.

edit: when I said 1/150 I meant with extension tubes meaning over 1/1

 

[kamakiri]

Considering you have the MPE-65, if I were in your situation I would buy the closest I could get to a 200mm macro not a 100mm, despite its "L" marking. (SR, which is pentax's version of IS, is in body and Its awesome I must say. Though for macro shots as you know the shutter speed has to be pretty decent. At least 1/150' unless you have super human steadiness B) .)

Edit: I still think they didn't need a whole new macro lens to give the "L" marking. Their regular 100mm macro is and has been definitely good enough for it.

I'm just going to replace my original Canon 100 non-IS. If you check the MTF charts, the new lens is significantly sharper. And that should make a difference on the new cameras with much higher pixel density.

I understand what you are getting at for the longer reach, but I'm already covered that way with the Sigma platform and for Canon with short teles/tubes/TCs.

But for macro shots without flash, I typically do push limits on handholding and really long shutter speeds. Even down to 1/30 at 1x.

 

[yeatzee]

Im curious to see some examples at 1/30. You got any?

So you shoot sigma also? I hear of people that do on occasion, but almost all of them do it for macro. Is there a reason?

I almost think any sharper, and paper will be cut in half while printing images using said lens. I mean, my sigma is so fricken sharp its not even funny. I need to take much effort in PP to hide peoples flaws when I use it for portraits at F/2.8 I wouldn't dare stop it down!

My dream macro lens: http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/product/smcpfa200_lg.jpg

The legendary Pentax FA* 200mm F/4 :mellow:

 

[kamakiri]

Im curious to see some examples at 1/30. You got any?So you shoot sigma also? I hear of people that do on occasion, but almost all of them do it for macro. Is there a reason?

I almost think any sharper, and paper will be cut in half while printing images using said lens. I mean, my sigma is so fricken sharp its not even funny. I need to take much effort in PP to hide peoples flaws when I use it for portraits at F/2.8 I wouldn't dare stop it down!

My dream macro lens:

The legendary Pentax FA* 200mm F/4 :mellow:

I'll have to dig to find on that is exactly 1/30 or under...

This one is with the MP-E (so it's at least 1X) that's 1/50:

Exif Data:

Camera: Canon EOS 5D

Exposure: 0.02 sec (1/50)

Aperture: f/2.8

Focal Length: 65 mm

ISO Speed: 400

Exposure Bias: 0 EV

The trick is practice...I like using long shutter speeds and handhold much lower than most will try. Very important for weddings and low-light situations. Also doesn't hurt that I have a lot of time and practice at the rifle range. I use a lot of the same techniques for photography. With IS, I often shoot in the 1/4 to 1/3 second range. That's what I'm really excited about.

 

[yeatzee]

My issue has been partly my beastly setup im sure. (quite heavy)

I guess I pixel peep to much You wouldnt mind posting a larger version of the picture you posted would you? Unless you used a tripod ( I doubt it as you and I know both steady hands are much better for macro) there will be signs of motion. Or like I said you have godly steady hands

(I shoot too. Competitively in .22LR with my CZUSA 452 and trap/skeet with my remingtion 870)

 

[kamakiri]

That picture, if I remember correctly, will show pixel or two level blur at 100%. I usually upload the full size jpg, unless it's cropped or resized for pixel level quality. With a 13 MP camera, I think that's still okay.

I do a lot of pixel peeping myself, but I won't let it get in the way of getting the shot. I care about it when I know the work is to be printed large or needs to be cropped. Otherwise, what's the point?

Different shot at 100%

Another shot at 100% (Sigma SD14 with 150mm +1.4 TC)

 

[yeatzee]

very impressive. That second show is awesome and very creative with thin DOF!

 

[kamakiri]

very impressive. That second show is awesome and very creative with thin DOF!

Thanks- I was thinking you might ask for a sample at 1/30 :lol: ...so I popped one shot for a sample. 30D, MP-E, 1/30 Intended focus point is on the near compound eye.

full size

EXIF:

Camera: Canon EOS 30D

Exposure: 0.033 sec (1/30)

Aperture: f/9.0

Focal Length: 65 mm

ISO Speed: 3200

Exposure Bias: 0 EV

Flash: Off, Did not fire

EDIT:

fixed pic link?

 

[yeatzee]

i cant see the image?

Edit: yup I can see it. Thanks for the example

I can't wait to see the images you take when you get this beast.

 

[yen_saw]

Now i need to get rid of my Sigma 180mm macro and get this. Thanks for the info Grant.

 

[kamakiri]

:lol: Looks like Yen might beat me to it!

I did swap some of my older 'pro' gear for a next to new 7D...I figured I could use the smaller pixels for macro and the new 100mmIS should be able to better match the resolution. So far I've been happy with it and the test 100% crops as posted in the 'Eye see you...' picture thread.

And to be clear, I'm not a proponent of more megapixels in general...as it only is a benefit when used with lenses that will resolve detail close to the sensor's pixel pitch/resolution. Very few of Canon's lenses can even produce that fine level detail, but the macros seem to do a good job of not 'wasting' the extra pixels.

 

[kamakiri]

Wifey says UPS stopped by today!

 

[yeatzee]

Congratulations! I expect amazing pictures in the next day or too :lol:

 

[kamakiri]

Well, don't hold your breath for *amazing* pictures just yet...I still need to figure out the limits of the IS at macro distances.

Posted my first test shots here:

Thread in photo forum