Canon Macro Twin Lite MT-26EX-RT question

I have an EOS R5 and the EF 100mm L macro lens.  Recently I decided that I wanted to get the Macro twin lite for my system, and three weeks ago I ordered it direct from Canon.  I immediately received a backorder notice and have not yet received my flash.  With Spring sprouting up, I would really like to have my lite.  I know I can shoot macro without it, but have been anxiously looking forward to shooting with it.  Just wondering if anyone here has this light, and if so, how long it took to get it.

I'm in the same situation as you. I've been using a Meike MK-MT24II-C twin flash, and want to move up to the Canon flash. Of course, just when I decide to hand somebody all that money for the Canon flash, nobody has it in stock (other than some miscreant on Amazon who wants about $1300 for the kit). I'm monitoring for availability, and will post here if I find anyone selling them (after ordering my copy ).

Larry

Looks like we're practically neighbors.  I'm south of Canal, almost to Chestnut Ridge.  I can usually find anything I need at Midwest Photo, but they're on backorder, too.  So, I figured Canon Direct was my best shot, but no luck so far.

danferrin wrote:

Looks like we're practically neighbors. I'm south of Canal, almost to Chestnut Ridge. I can usually find anything I need at Midwest Photo, but they're on backorder, too. So, I figured Canon Direct was my best shot, but no luck so far.

We are indeed nearly neighbors. I'm just north of Gahanna and south of Blendon Woods Metro Park.

I'm starting to think that the Canon macro flash might be a victim of the infamous chip shortage. I'll keep looking!

Larry

Thank you John.  Those really are great shots, and good information.  My primary intention for the macro twin lite was to photograph my wife’s jewelry, which she sells online.  Mostly, she does beaded bracelets, and I thought the macro.lens and light would be a good solution.  Because of the unavailability of the light, we’ve decided to go with a continuous light source and bought three of the Westcott Solix bicolor lights and a Novoflex Magic studio setup.  Still plan to use the 100mm macro on the R5, but with continuous light, my wife will be able to judge the lighting better before we shoot.

by the way, I called Canon support yesterday to ask when they expected to ship the twin lite, and they had no idea.

While I'm waiting for the Canon Macro Twin Lite to show up, I thought I would explain how I use a macro twin flash. (I'm currently using the Meike version.)

I don't take "true" macro shots of the sort John K discusses using a twin flash. I sometimes delve into that type of photography, but when I do it's with totally different lighting.

I also don't use the twin flash to take photos of small items like jewelry; for that I use a softbox as suggested by danferrin.

I use the twin flash for a specific kind of plant photography, using a technique that was taught to me by an ace naturalist/photographer a few years ago. My goal is to get photos of small plants like tree buds and wildflowers using lighting that throws the background of the photo into almost complete darkness. If I do it right, the result is a photo that doesn't need a lot of postprocessing to look like a "scientific specimen" photo.

First my gear, which includes a Canon EOS M6 Mark II with a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM macro attached using a Canon adapter. The Meike twin flash is attached to the end of the lens, of course.

The camera is set to Manual mode. The flash is set to manual at 100% power. The shutter speed is set to the camera's sync speed, which in the case of this camera is 1/200 second. The ISO is set to either 100 or 200. The f/stop is initially set to a really small aperture, like f/22 or even f/32. I take a couple of test shots, adjusting the f/stop as needed for proper exposure.

Here are three examples from a recent outing to photograph early-spring tree buds; hopefully, the EXIF details will survive the upload.

Larry

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I've tried on-camera and off-camera Speed Lite type flashes (most recently the Canon 600EX II-RT), several brands of ring flashes, and two brands of twin macro flash, and I prefer the results and flexibility I get using the twin macro flash.

I work alone in the field (mostly local and state parks), and due to physical limitations (mostly just aging), I try hard to travel light. The combination of a mirrorless camera and a lens-mounted twin flash give me the best bang for my buck.

Larry

Thanks to both John and Larry for your perspective.  I’ve looked at both of your work and am impressed by both.  I look forward to getting my twin flash, whenever it shows up, and learning what I can do whit it.

John K wrote:

Larry Cunningham wrote:

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

The inverse square law is physics Larry so you are not disagreeing with me, but with science.

I was not disagreeing with you regarding the inverse square law, and I resent the implication that I'm that ignorant. I've been a serious amateur photographer for well over fifty years, I don't need any lectures on basic optics. I never stated nor implied that I had somehow discovered something new to science or photography. I described my method for the sake of those who might not be familiar with the technique. Not everybody is as savvy as you obviously are.

I was disagreeing with this statement of yours:

"I call it macro on easy mode because anyone, with any flash, can do it."

You can indeed do it with any flash, or any light source for that matter, but I have found that I get by far the best results with a twin flash.

Please don't expect any more replies from me in this thread. For whatever reason, you seem determined to argue about something not worth arguing about, and life is too short.

Larry

danferrin wrote:

I have an EOS R5 and the EF 100mm L macro lens. Recently I decided that I wanted to get the Macro twin lite for my system, and three weeks ago I ordered it direct from Canon. I immediately received a backorder notice and have not yet received my flash. With Spring sprouting up, I would really like to have my lite. I know I can shoot macro without it, but have been anxiously looking forward to shooting with it. Just wondering if anyone here has this light, and if so, how long it took to get it.

I use the Yongnuo twin flash. Its solid. I havent tried it with my R mount yet though. I will test it out. I also had the yongnuo ring flash and there were some compatability issues when I sold my 70d to replace with 80d so I would make sure it works, but if it is all clear, I can definitely suggest it. Honestly, I wouldnt pay the price for tcanon twin flash with other options

John K wrote:

Larry Cunningham wrote:

John K wrote:

Larry Cunningham wrote:

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

The inverse square law is physics Larry so you are not disagreeing with me, but with science.

I was not disagreeing with you regarding the inverse square law, and I resent the implication that I'm that ignorant. I've been a serious amateur photographer for well over fifty years, I don't need any lectures on basic optics. I never stated nor implied that I had somehow discovered something new to science or photography.

From a previous post of yours:

"I use the twin flash for a specific kind of plant photography, using a technique that was taught to me by an ace naturalist/photographer a few years ago. My goal is to get photos of small plants like tree buds and wildflowers using lighting that throws the background of the photo into almost complete darkness. If I do it right, the result is a photo that doesn't need a lot of postprocessing to look like a "scientific specimen" photo."

You do not need to be an "ace photographer" to let the background go black due to flash fall off, and no one flash will give you better results than another one. They all are effected equally by the inverse square law. You made black backgrounds sound difficult or special, when anyone can do it and it is easy...

Edit: Not really trying to pick on you, I just do not want to see someone buy a twin flash thinking that it will perform differently than a standard flash unit. Also it kinda sounds to me like you are trying to talk yourself into getting a twin flash, and me thinks you are gonna be disappointing with it. Out of the box they are BRUTALLY harsh and difficult to diffuse in a short distance.

Easy boys. Goodness gracious.

While John is def right that its very easy to drown out all ambient light, even in the middle of the day with almost any speedlight, twin flashes do have a purpose I specifically use them for - or I should say a couple purposes now. Ironically, one of them is lighting the background as I prefer not have black backgrounds in most of my shots. I will get to those in a second. Before I do, I want to add that while I agree with John that using the twin flash without being creative with solutions does make it less than optimal with longer working distance macro lenses. Its harsh because the light is too far from subject. However, there are small magic arms that can mount to the adapter giving you much more flexability with flash head placement. You can easily get the heads with diffusers right on the subject while using a 100mm macro for instance. Not to mention, you can simply reduce working distance by using an achromat. The DCR250 changes magnification from 1:1 (min) - 2:1 (max) if memory serves.

One thing the twin flash does is "mold" the subject. When you use a speedlight, it creates a pleasing, but flat lit image because all of the light is coming from just slightly above and directly from the camera. Kind of like beauty lighting in portraits, but sometimes in the macro images shadow can be an issue. When you use 2 lights from different angles it gives depth to the subject. You can also use it so you have a main/key light and fill, getting rid of the shadow issues.

Lastly, I have another set up with much longer arms. I will sometimes  use one flash to light the subject and have the other light at full blast hitting the background. This has worked great sometimes and helps me from having to hold something to work as a background behind a skittish bug.

Using the yongnuo twin flash to light background

Notice catch lights in spider. Both lights evenly lighting opposite sides giving a feeling of depth. Especially around the spiders chelicerae. I feel like I can grab them.

One last photo showing both the depth Nd the fill made possible witb 2 lights

Oh, let me also add, and this time without caveats, that JK is absolutely right about twin flashes not being an out of the box and off to the races type thing --- well, unless you are taking shots that dont necessarily require "pleasing" light, like if you are just documenting different specimens of insect, whatevs. Maybe it will be fine. But if you want pleasing, non harsh light, it takes some time and practice...and experimenting, but thats 3/4 of the fun of photography! I will say this, Im not yet content with my diffusing solutions. I have a couple ways to diffuse with them, but I think I can still come up with something better. I also really, really LOVE the long arms for some situations but I keep breaking them. Sooooo frustrating. I just wish someone would make them so they can be moved around a lot without snapping. The ones I used was basically a long arca plate with 2 goosenecks attached on either side. I just attached cold shoes to the ends and vula. Those things are super strong. Could hold 2 small speedlights, but that would be a beast to handle. Its just when I keep adjusting them, eventually they snap where the arms connect to the plate. Errrrrr