Macros with the Ms

[panamforeman]

Inadvertently I posted this on the Powershot Forum. Of course I got no answers.

That Forum is almost always dominated by SX50 owners. The only time it's interesting is when Canon releases a new Powershot camera, like the GX7 and G1X Mk2 etc.

This is what I mistakenly posted:

With this question I reveal my amateur status.....so be it:

Which of the 4 EOS M lenses is best for Macros? And how would you set it up?

I am going to buy the Canon EF S 60MM macro lens eventually, which I hear is the best Macro lens ever.

And BTW I have all 3 M bodies. Just received the M3 two days ago. Just now getting around to using it. But so far I'm really impressed and think it was money well spent.

 

[rrccad]

Inadvertently I posted this on the Powershot Forum. Of course I got no answers.

That Forum is almost always dominated by SX50 owners. The only time it's interesting is when Canon releases a new Powershot camera, like the GX7 and G1X Mk2 etc.

This is what I mistakenly posted:

With this question I reveal my amateur status.....so be it:

Which of the 4 EOS M lenses is best for Macros? And how would you set it up

I bought some el-cheapo tube extenders for the 18-55 worked good .. probably works nice too with the 55-200mm but never tried.

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

 

[panamforeman]

Inadvertently I posted this on the Powershot Forum. Of course I got no answers.

That Forum is almost always dominated by SX50 owners. The only time it's interesting is when Canon releases a new Powershot camera, like the GX7 and G1X Mk2 etc.

This is what I mistakenly posted:

With this question I reveal my amateur status.....so be it:

Which of the 4 EOS M lenses is best for Macros? And how would you set it up

I bought some el-cheapo tube extenders for the 18-55 worked good .. probably works nice too with the 55-200mm but never tried.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52120535

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51828448

Those are really nice. Just what I want to do. 18-55 it is.

 

[rjjr]

I am going to buy the Canon EF S 60MM macro lens eventually, which I hear is the best Macro lens ever.

I had the EF-S 60/2.8 macro and the EF 100/2.8 macro for several years but when the EF 100/2.8L IS was released, I found it to be better than both so I use that now and I sold the others.

 

[crashpc]

Inadvertently I posted this on the Powershot Forum. Of course I got no answers.

That Forum is almost always dominated by SX50 owners. The only time it's interesting is when Canon releases a new Powershot camera, like the GX7 and G1X Mk2 etc.

This is what I mistakenly posted:

With this question I reveal my amateur status.....so be it:

Which of the 4 EOS M lenses is best for Macros? And how would you set it up?

I am going to buy the Canon EF S 60MM macro lens eventually, which I hear is the best Macro lens ever.

And BTW I have all 3 M bodies. Just received the M3 two days ago. Just now getting around to using it. But so far I'm really impressed and think it was money well spent.

Unless there is no macro lens with M mount, you have no other choice than use macro extension tubes or EF macro lenses via adapter. I cannot find any extension tubes for M in my country, so I use EF extension tubes for my EF glass.

If I would recommend some lens for macro with M, it would be 100+mm lens. It gives you that reach, so you don´t have to touch photographed object or your lens is not blocking light from the object...

 

[panamforeman]

I am going to buy the Canon EF S 60MM macro lens eventually, which I hear is the best Macro lens ever.

I had the EF-S 60/2.8 macro and the EF 100/2.8 macro for several years but when the EF 100/2.8L IS was released, I found it to be better than both so I use that now and I sold the others.

Thanks for the info. Will certainly take your recommends to heart.

 

[panamforeman]

Inadvertently I posted this on the Powershot Forum. Of course I got no answers.

That Forum is almost always dominated by SX50 owners. The only time it's interesting is when Canon releases a new Powershot camera, like the GX7 and G1X Mk2 etc.

This is what I mistakenly posted:

With this question I reveal my amateur status.....so be it:

Which of the 4 EOS M lenses is best for Macros? And how would you set it up?

I am going to buy the Canon EF S 60MM macro lens eventually, which I hear is the best Macro lens ever.

And BTW I have all 3 M bodies. Just received the M3 two days ago. Just now getting around to using it. But so far I'm really impressed and think it was money well spent.

Unless there is no macro lens with M mount, you have no other choice than use macro extension tubes or EF macro lenses via adapter. I cannot find any extension tubes for M in my country, so I use EF extension tubes for my EF glass.

If I would recommend some lens for macro with M, it would be 100+mm lens. It gives you that reach, so you don´t have to touch photographed object or your lens is not blocking light from the object...

Yes, rjjr has recommended the EF 100/2.8L IS. will probably buy that eventually.

Somewhere on the EOS M forum I saw a photo of someone with extension tubes on a M lens. Looked for it but couldn't find it.

thanks.

 

[jadphoto]

You can also use plus diopter lenses, also know as close-up filters, with pretty good results. They simply screw on the lens like a filter and unlike extension tubes, there is no loss of light.

There are cheap sets available, usually with a +1, +2, and a +4 diopter in a case, but these are single element lenses and you'll sacrifice some sharpness, especially at the edges of the frame.

A better choice would be multi-element plus diopter lenses. Canon makes a couple in different sizes, the one I use on the M/M3 lenses is the Canon Close Up Lens 240. It's a 52mm filter so it fits the 18-55 directly and can be adapted to the other lenses. For my "grown-up" cameras I use the Canon Close Up Lens 500D. It's a 77mm filter so it fits my "L" glass.

Nikon used to make several multi-element close up lenses, 3T and 4T (52mm) and the 5T and 6T (62mm). I still have a set of the 5T/6T lenses and use a 67mm to 62mm stepping ring to use them on my 70-200 f/4L. That combination works a treat and can be found used on Ebay.

The plus diopter lenses are just a bit thicker than a standard filter so they take up very little room in your camera bag, are very sharp (the multi-element ones), and there is no loss of light as with extension tubes.

I always have at least one with me.

JD

 

[SCGirl]

B&h Photo has these: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/974083-REG/vello_ext_cme_auto_focus_extension_tube.html

i was considering getting these myself. I have the EF 100 2.8, but the tubes would be lighter to carry in the field.

 

[Bedspringlex]

here is a 52mm #240 very reasonable.

Loading…

www.bhphotovideo.com

might be what you are looking for, maybe.

 

[Marco Nero]

Inadvertently I posted this on the Powershot Forum. Of course I got no answers.

That Forum is almost always dominated by SX50 owners. The only time it's interesting is when Canon releases a new Powershot camera, like the GX7 and G1X Mk2 etc.

This is what I mistakenly posted:

With this question I reveal my amateur status.....so be it:

Which of the 4 EOS M lenses is best for Macros? And how would you set it up?

I am going to buy the Canon EF S 60MM macro lens eventually, which I hear is the best Macro lens ever.

And BTW I have all 3 M bodies. Just received the M3 two days ago. Just now getting around to using it. But so far I'm really impressed and think it was money well spent.

.





I don't recommend the MR-EX14 Ringflash for the EOS-M. Only one of the pictures below was produced with this flash. It's very cumbersome and I'd suggest other alternatives. BUT, I would certainly recommend the RingFlash adapter ring which sits on the front of the 100mmL lens and allows the RingFlash to clip on... Why? Because it reduces the diameter of the lens' filter-threads and allows you use a 58mm filter and 58mm filter cap on it. Much cheaper and very practical.

This is how I carry my EOS-M + 100mmL. There's a tiny Manfrotto mini-tripod with folding legs underneath it, mounted to the EF-EF-M Adapter ring tripod mount - which also acts as a grip for me.


.
.
EOS-M with the 100mmL Macro Lens...
I weighed up the Macro lenses for the EOS-M and ordered my EF lens before I purchased the EOS-M. The EF 100mm f/2.8L MACRO IS USM lens was my choice. If you really enjoy Macro photography, the 100mmL has image stabilization and it also doubles as an excellent portrait lens - something it is renowned for by studio photographers. I've also used it for distant landscapes. Weather sealing and the ability to use it with any EF mounting DSLR makes it appealing. In low light it needs to be steadied but it's a magnificent lens. The EF-S 60mm Macro was released in 2005 but the EF 100mmL Macro was released in 2009. Tne non-L version of the 100mm Macro does NOT have IS - so, although the results are similar, the IS is essential when using it on a non-FF camera like the EOS-M. Also, the prices have dropped in recent years for this lens.
.
As for the native EF-M lenses, I think the nearest you can get to a "Macro" shot would probably be with the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens. I've seen some very nice closeups with this lens although I don't think I'd call them "Macro" shots. This lens produces about a 37mm focal length on the EOS-M's hefty APS-C sensor.
.
The EF-S Macro lens is indeed very good although I'd say it's not quite as versatile as the EF 100mmL. Another problem is that should you ever go "Full Frame", you won't be able to use an EF-S lens on the FF mount because the mirror will catch on the back of the lens... where it sits too deeply inside the camera. If you don't think you'll use your lens on a FF camera, then that won't be an issue.
.
Remember that on the EOS-M (which has an APS-C sized sensor) that there will be a 1.6x crop factor present with any lens. This means the 100mm becomes a 160mm lens. Note also that when the EOS-M was first released, the 100mm lens was VERY slow on the camera for some reason. Now it's much faster since Canon released a Firmware update for the EOS-M. The EOS-M2 and M3 models are said to be faster. Even with the slower AF speeds in low light, this is a magnificent lens and one that every photographer should at least consider. I was using mine yesterday and again this morning on a different camera. On the EOS-M, the magnificent "Magnify Feature" allows for some impressive work with this lens because it allows for much more concise control over the region you want in focus.
.
SAMPLES I've taken with the EF 100mmL f/2.8L MACRO IS USM lens and the EOS-M camera... There's plenty of other pictures out there online by others using this lens that are very impressive. I'd suggest putting a folder together with samples from different lenses that you like and then using that to decided on which lens is most important to you.

.

.

.

--
Regards,
Marco Nero.
www.pbase.com/nero_design

 

[panamforeman]

Inadvertently I posted this on the Powershot Forum. Of course I got no answers.

That Forum is almost always dominated by SX50 owners. The only time it's interesting is when Canon releases a new Powershot camera, like the GX7 and G1X Mk2 etc.

This is what I mistakenly posted:

With this question I reveal my amateur status.....so be it:

Which of the 4 EOS M lenses is best for Macros? And how would you set it up?

I am going to buy the Canon EF S 60MM macro lens eventually, which I hear is the best Macro lens ever.

And BTW I have all 3 M bodies. Just received the M3 two days ago. Just now getting around to using it. But so far I'm really impressed and think it was money well spent.

.


I don't recommend the MR-EX14 Ringflash for the EOS-M. Only one of the pictures below was produced with this flash. It's very cumbersome and I'd suggest other alternatives. BUT, I would certainly recommend the RingFlash adapter ring which sits on the front of the 100mmL lens and allows the RingFlash to clip on... Why? Because it reduces the diameter of the lens' filter-threads and allows you use a 58mm filter and 58mm filter cap on it. Much cheaper and very practical.

This is how I carry my EOS-M + 100mmL. There's a tiny Manfrotto mini-tripod with folding legs underneath it, mounted to the EF-EF-M Adapter ring tripod mount - which also acts as a grip for me.

.
.
EOS-M with the 100mmL Macro Lens...
I weighed up the Macro lenses for the EOS-M and ordered my EF lens before I purchased the EOS-M. The EF 100mm f/2.8L MACRO IS USM lens was my choice. If you really enjoy Macro photography, the 100mmL has image stabilization and it also doubles as an excellent portrait lens - something it is renowned for by studio photographers. I've also used it for distant landscapes. Weather sealing and the ability to use it with any EF mounting DSLR makes it appealing. In low light it needs to be steadied but it's a magnificent lens. The EF-S 60mm Macro was released in 2005 but the EF 100mmL Macro was released in 2009. Tne non-L version of the 100mm Macro does NOT have IS - so, although the results are similar, the IS is essential when using it on a non-FF camera like the EOS-M. Also, the prices have dropped in recent years for this lens.
.
As for the native EF-M lenses, I think the nearest you can get to a "Macro" shot would probably be with the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens. I've seen some very nice closeups with this lens although I don't think I'd call them "Macro" shots. This lens produces about a 37mm focal length on the EOS-M's hefty APS-C sensor.
.
The EF-S Macro lens is indeed very good although I'd say it's not quite as versatile as the EF 100mmL. Another problem is that should you ever go "Full Frame", you won't be able to use an EF-S lens on the FF mount because the mirror will catch on the back of the lens... where it sits too deeply inside the camera. If you don't think you'll use your lens on a FF camera, then that won't be an issue.
.
Remember that on the EOS-M (which has an APS-C sized sensor) that there will be a 1.6x crop factor present with any lens. This means the 100mm becomes a 160mm lens. Note also that when the EOS-M was first released, the 100mm lens was VERY slow on the camera for some reason. Now it's much faster since Canon released a Firmware update for the EOS-M. The EOS-M2 and M3 models are said to be faster. Even with the slower AF speeds in low light, this is a magnificent lens and one that every photographer should at least consider. I was using mine yesterday and again this morning on a different camera. On the EOS-M, the magnificent "Magnify Feature" allows for some impressive work with this lens because it allows for much more concise control over the region you want in focus.
.
SAMPLES I've taken with the EF 100mmL f/2.8L MACRO IS USM lens and the EOS-M camera... There's plenty of other pictures out there online by others using this lens that are very impressive. I'd suggest putting a folder together with samples from different lenses that you like and then using that to decided on which lens is most important to you.

.

.

.

--
Regards,
Marco Nero.
www.pbase.com/nero_design

I do think the EF 100MM 2.8L Macro IS USM is a magnificent beast. And no doubt it would do me proud for macros and even portraits. However, what gives me pause is that the lens is more expensive than the M3. On a cost analysis basis.....will I use it enough to justify the cost? Whereas the Canon 60MM macro 2.8 in addition to being smaller and therefore less unwieldy, is only about $300......versus $800+ for the 100MM 2.8 IS.

The M2 & M3 are the only ILC cameras I have. I sold all my expensive and heavy gear couple of years ago, to lighten the load. I have the G1X (love that one) the G16, S95 & S110. I also have the M1, but it's packed in its box. I'll probably sell it soon.

Those cameras satisfy all my photo instincts & desires now.

I will give serious considerations to your suggestion on the 100MM macro. Knowing me? I'll probably get it, but parsimonious as I am I will wait for a good deal, which I'm hopeful will pop up......soon!

Thanks for the info. And I do enjoy all your "informative" posts.

Gary

Dallas Texas

 

[Tocsa]

One thing that people tend to overlook when first getting in to macro is working distance. If you expect to be taking pictures of things that move or fly off then a 100mm lens will give you about an extra 10cm (~20cm vs ~30cm) vs a 60. This might not seem much but can often be the difference between subjects getting disturbed or not.

if you go down the other route suggested here of using close up lenses and extension tubes you will have a very short working distance. That's fine for still objects.

For a cost effective route you could look at an old FD or other manual macro lens and use it on the M with adapter. Most macro shots are probably better taken with MF anyway, especially if you have focus peaking as on the M3 and the M with Magic Lantern (note focus peaking is not available with M2).

Some old manual lens suggestions:

Tamron 90

Canon FD 100 or 200 if you can find one (also not cheap)

Kiron 105

Tokina 90 (aka the Bokina)

Of these, only the Kiron and the 200FD go 1:1 without an adapter. There are other brands of the Kiron that is essentially the same lens

 

[panamforeman]

One thing that people tend to overlook when first getting in to macro is working distance. If you expect to be taking pictures of things that move or fly off then a 100mm lens will give you about an extra 10cm (~20cm vs ~30cm) vs a 60. This might not seem much but can often be the difference between subjects getting disturbed or not.

if you go down the other route suggested here of using close up lenses and extension tubes you will have a very short working distance. That's fine for still objects.

For a cost effective route you could look at an old FD or other manual macro lens and use it on the M with adapter. Most macro shots are probably better taken with MF anyway, especially if you have focus peaking as on the M3 and the M with Magic Lantern (note focus peaking is not available with M2).

Some old manual lens suggestions:

Tamron 90

Canon FD 100 or 200 if you can find one (also not cheap)

Kiron 105

Tokina 90 (aka the Bokina)

Of these, only the Kiron and the 200FD go 1:1 without an adapter. There are other brands of the Kiron that is essentially the same lens

Thank you for your advice, I do appreciate it! I will take your advice in consideration. When I think of all the Canon FD lenses I use to own and sold on E-Bay.........?

I will check their availability.

Thanks again.

 

[shnypnny]

OK, so I have owned my first EOS M (the 3) which is also my first interchangeable lens camera for what, two weeks now, and I want to know two things to avoid another case buyers remorse like I had when I found out I couldn't use the Tamron 18-200mm which I was hoping would be my goto macro setup. I have been pretty happy with the results from tubes and the 11-22mm native, but I want to go even smaller. Is anyone using the Yasuhara Nahona 5:1 with the M3 or the Canon MP-E 65mm? I was wondering if the Yasuhara is too much of a toy in comparison and if it actually works with the M3. I think I understand the limitations of the ultra macros, and the need for rails if you want full imaging. I just talked myself into the Yasuhara especially because it's $400 right now with shipping and weighs less than half the alternative, doesn't require an extra flash mechanism, and I also have an M2 coming to fall back on (coming with the replacement lenses for my Tamron). Though it does require unscrewing the existing flash mechanism to operate without flash (stupid). I am all in on this ef-m now, FIRE AWAY!

I still have another question though...I was wondering about taking pictures through the microscope. Does anyone have rec's for a setup whether through the eye tube or a photo 2.5X tube trinocular mount?

Thanks, Garrett