Telephoto / macro combo for wildlife photography?

macaw2 wrote:

photonius wrote:

macaw2 wrote:

Hi,

Next month, I will be going to Borneo (I'm super excited!) and I will be bringing my 50mm prime and 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS with my 600D. But I realise to make the 'most' of this trip, it is probably the time for me to invest in a macro and a telephoto lens. I have looked around a lot and the huge amounts of information on the internet / forums is just a little too overwhelming for me!

I currently am thinking:

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM or

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS II USM [used!]

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM or

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM

Do you guys think the 70-300mm and 100mm macro are good lenses, or would you recommend different ones? Happy to consider anything that isn't too pricey!!).

I know generally the mantra is that if you can afford an 'L' lens, then you will not regret it as its build/quality is much better. But they're almost double the price! If I were to get those two lenses, would you get them both non-L? If not, which one as an L would you get (I can't afford both!) - as to me, they both look like that have the same specifications?

Thanks!

Weight might be of importance for a jungle hike. The lightweight 55-250 STM was already mentioned. However, it also has quite good close-up capability, ~1:3. Add a close-up lens (e.g. Canon 500D achromat) to this lens, and you get almost 1:1 magnification like a macro lens. See also https://photonius.jimdo.com/macro/ for close-up lenses and extension tubes (which you could use on the 50mm), and a comparison of a 55-250 IS+500D with a 60mm macro (the 55-250 IS is not quite as good as the 55-250 STM).

The new Canon EF-S 35mm macro might also be in interesting option - it could perhaps replace your 50mm and offers macro as well. The working distance is short, but then for longer working distances, you could use the 55-250 STM (~ 1 meter at 1:3).

Does the Canon 500D achromat work in the same way as the "Raynox DCR-250" attachment? With the macro lens, I was looking at ~100mm as that's probably the right length for insects/animals?

both are achromatic close-up lenses. But the Raynox DCR-250 is stronger (see https://photonius.jimdo.com/macro/) , it is better suited to be used on the 50mm lens. Working wise they work both the same way, they attach to the front (the canon comes in different filter sizes that screw to the front), and you loose infinity focus. AF working range will be limited.

As to focal length: At macro distances (1:1) the focal length is the most important factor for working distance (distance between front of lens and subject). The longer, the more distance. Yes, 100mm is a good focal length. But for some animals, even longer would be better. For some other animals (ants), it doesn't matter, what is more important then that there is enough distance to get light onto the subject.