smordecai
newbie
Reged: 31/01/2008
Posts: 13
|
|
Hi ya,
Ok i have purchased a new 450d with the kit 18-55 is lens, and have also purchased a ef-s 55-250 is lens...
Can some recommend a good lens (cheap as possible really as limited funds at min due to above outlay!) for close photographs of butterflys, as i take my niece a lot to butterfly inclouseures, or some thing that i can add to my current lens to get good pictures, i noticed on ebay you can buy screw on things that go +1 +2 +4 +10 macro... are these any good?
|
Dorset_Mike
Gadget Man
Reged: 11/05/2006
Posts: 1966
Loc: Poole, Dorset.
|
|
The screw in +1, 2, 4 & 10 will allow you to take close ups, but the image quality will not be brilliant when compared to a macro lens.
If you can afford it the Cosina 100/3.5 (AKA the plastic fantastic) has reports of being good optical value for the money, reviewers may slate the build quality but seem to agree that the optical performance is well worth the money.
Dearer is the Tamron 90/2.8 about twice the price of the Cosina but cheaper than the Canon offerings.
Another alternative would be extension rings, or an older (second hand) manual focus lens(e.g. M42 screw mount) and the relevant adapter to the Canon mount.
--------------------
Cheers, MIKE 
 
|
Overread
old hand
Reged: 17/01/2008
Posts: 1002
Loc: UK; Suffolk
|
|
There are attachments you can add that will magify the results of a lens - the canon 500D (its a lens attachment not a camera  ) does such and is available in different sizes for different lenses.
However nothing is really going to beat a proper macro lens. If you know you really want to do this sort of photography then nothing is going to beat a proper macro lens. Canon do a range of them:
Canon Macro lenses
The canon 100mm macro is one of the most popular macro lenses for canon cameras and can devliver very good results. There is also a line of sigma macro lenses to consider which rivel the canon range for quality
sigma macro lenses
How much do you want to do macro photography and how much do you really have in budget at the moment (and most importantly how long can you save/go without macro).
--------------------
My photography blog
http://overread.wordpress.com
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 7966
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Have you tried the 55-250 at the butterfly farm? You may well find it goes close enough for pics of full butterflies as many of them are quite big and I suspect the IS might be handy!
You might need to do a little cropping but I think I'd rather do that than add a close up filter. If you find yourself not able to get as close as you would like you can always add a filter on later.....if your niece is anything like my friend's kid you'll be at the butterfly every other week  Is hard enough trying to keep up with her never mind trying to take pictures aswell 
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3724
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
I recent trip to photograph butterflies showed me how hard it can be.
I have a set of add on close up lenses but they're for close work and not for shooting at any sort of distance. I think that you'd be better off using a long lens with a greater working distance than attempting to use add on close up lenses as the butterflies may just fly off if you attempt to get close enough to use a lens fitted with an add on close up lens. You may also need to crank up the ISO if you're photographing the butterflies indoors.
Have you not had success with the 55-250?
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
LargeFormat
veteran
Reged: 24/10/2006
Posts: 1213
Loc: Buckinghamshire and Cumbria
|
|
In the olden days I used to use bellows and reversing rings for closeups. Are such things still made/available, particularly for digital cameras or have macro lenses completely superceded them. (I can see the problems with auto everything etc)
|
SqueamishOssifrage
veteran
Reged: 13/09/2006
Posts: 1513
Loc: Ayia Anna, Hub of the Universe
|
|
I still use bellows, with or without a reversing ring. The big drawback is that it has to be tripod-mounted, and thus limited to still (or seriously slow  )things. I have a set of extension tubes, but they are unfortunately not auto, so I have to use stop-down metering, or full manual - the diaphragm closing mechanism still works, but no aperture data is available to the camera. I can well see why people prefer a dedicated macro lens!
--------------------
'You people, you think I know duck nothing; I tell you: I know duck all.'
Credited to Michael Curtiz by David Niven
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 7966
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
In the olden days I used to use bellows and reversing rings for closeups. Are such things still made/available, particularly for digital cameras or have macro lenses completely superceded them. (I can see the problems with auto everything etc)
Yes, you can still get them. Most manufacturers only do macro lenses that focus down to 1:1 so if you want to shoot closer you still need bellows (or tubes) and a reversing ring. Or if you have a Canon you can get up to 5:1 without having to resort to using a teleconvertor or manual aperture controls on the lens.
Novaflex do a rather nice set of tilt and shift bellows. You can get some auto adaptor thing that prevents the need for stop-down metering too 
Sure macro lenses tend to have AF but I don't know many that use it for macro work....and on some macro lenses the AF is so slow you are probably quicker manually focusing anyway!
One of my Flickr contacts uses a reversed 50mm on extension tubes and gets some fantastic results: See here. I don't think the reversing ring or extension tubes cost much either!
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38306
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
They exist, but they're pretty expensive - thee combined cost from Mr CAD is £499!
The cheapest options are extension tubes or close-up lenses, both of which start pretty cheap indeed, and go through to fairly dear. I got a set of second-hand Jessops tubes for £25, and a rather superior Canon 500T close-up lens for £35 as "new old stock", and that I've used for some years now for butterflies with telephoto lenses. Are the cheapos on ebay worth buying? Don't know, but I suspect they are only if you're not too picky about quality.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
SqueamishOssifrage
veteran
Reged: 13/09/2006
Posts: 1513
Loc: Ayia Anna, Hub of the Universe
|
|
Quote:
.... and a rather superior Canon 500T close-up lens for £35 as "new old stock", and that I've used for some years now for butterflies with telephoto lenses. Are the cheapos on ebay worth buying? Don't know, but I suspect they are only if you're not too picky about quality.
I have a set of Tiffen close-up lenses at 1,2 and 4 dioptres. The instructions say you can stack 1 and 2 to get 3 dioptres, but that is pushing it a little bit quality-wise. On their own, each one is generally speaking acceptable - they should be for what they cost!  )
--------------------
'You people, you think I know duck nothing; I tell you: I know duck all.'
Credited to Michael Curtiz by David Niven
|
Dorset_Mike
Gadget Man
Reged: 11/05/2006
Posts: 1966
Loc: Poole, Dorset.
|
|
Quote:
They exist, but they're pretty expensive - thee combined cost from Mr CAD is £499!
As Andrew has said most people use manual focus for macro, so why go to the expense of AF bellows, extension tubes etc.
If you want bellows the cheapest way is to go for M42 screw fit ones, often about £20 on Ebay, M42 to Canon adapter Ebay Hong Kong/Chinese shops under a tenner unless you want one with focus confirm chip, even those are quite cheap. Reversing rings from the same source about £5 plus P&P. If using reversing rings it makes sense to get a manual focus lens from ebay as well, again M42 fit are plentiful and comparatively cheap.
While you're in the Ebay shops get a focus rail as well.
--------------------
Cheers, MIKE
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38306
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
It's not so much for AF, but to allow stop-down of the aperture TBH. That said, I DO have an M42 bellows, and use a reversed 50mm f2.8 Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar on it, which works very well. Just the hassle of bellows means I don't use it a lot...
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 7966
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
Just the hassle of bellows means I don't use it a lot...
Where the convienece of a certain macro lens.......
....ach, you know the rest
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
spangler
addict
Reged: 04/04/2008
Posts: 462
Loc: Aylesbury
|
|
I use a 50mm f1.8 M42 Pentax lens reversed on my bellows (old Russian ones) and have a gizmo that screws onto the business end of the lens that accepts a cable release to stop it down, used with a focus slide it works a teat with my D200.
Regards, Andrew
--------------------
Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative.
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 5268
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
used with a focus slide it works a teat with my D200.
ROFL, the mind boggles.... 'aving trouble with our "r"s again are we?
|
Dave_Cox
old'n'grumpy
Reged: 12/07/2006
Posts: 3236
Loc: somewhere in Sussex
|
|
This picture has won an award on Flikr, and was taken at a butterfly garden using the macro setting on a 70-300mm Sigma zoom:
or link to the full size:
Flikr image
Warehouse Express currently have this lens for under £100.
--------------------
Growing old disgracefully!
http://snapper56.deviantart.com/gallery/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dave2006/
|
Overread
old hand
Reged: 17/01/2008
Posts: 1002
Loc: UK; Suffolk
|
|
If you go for the sigma 70-300 try and go for the APO version if you can - its a slightly better lens than the original version.
Remember that the sigma is a 1:2 (or 2:1 I forget which way it goes) which means its not like a proper macro prime lens which gets 1:1 - the result being you can't get as close as with a true macro, but you can get some good results. The trick is it has a long minimum focusing distance which - whist nice for not disturbing the insects - can be fiddly to work with at times. Personally I find it a taunting lens for insect work - just not close enough for me - but slightly larger macro and close up work it works really well - just try to keep it on a tripod the whole time!
Another example of the sigma 70-300 macro:
linky
--------------------
My photography blog
http://overread.wordpress.com
|
PapaLazarou
Mr Joyful
Reged: 04/01/2006
Posts: 206
|
|
I use an old minolta rokkor 50mm Macro reversed on bellows via an eos>md adapter.
the problems I have had are:
the whole set up is very heavy, so handheld is not an option
the viewfinder is very dark so precise focusing (critical with such shallow depths of field) is cumbersome (especially as I use a micro adjust rail)
you need to use manual exposure (not that much of a problem, but not as fast as using AV as you need to adjust to get it right)
The pros are:
This set up was quite cheap as I only had to buy the EOS adapter
The image quality is pretty good
the magnification ratio is very high as well (up to 5x)
However for the reasons I have stated I think that such a set up would be impractical for butterflies, the long exposures and cumbersome set up will just be too slow, and if you are relying on the screen outdoors to set a manual exposure then it could be tricky.
I agree with the advice to try your own kit as is, you want to have some background for context anyway, the EOS450 has a high enough resolution that you can crop a fair bit if required. I would degrade the optics with screw in close up filters.
If you are set on getting a macro lens proper then look for the sigma 50mm or 70mm, these crop up occasionally used.
They require a closer working distance but are optically very very good for the money. I tried the canon 50mm macro (which I used to have on my old film EOS5) on a 400 and wasn't impressed.
I got the sigma 70 and its a peach.
|
Gordon_McGeachie
Joke Historian
Reged: 19/01/2007
Posts: 4248
Loc: East Yorkshire,
|
|
I have the Tamron 90mm and it is a cracker of a lens.
Typical Tamron quality, never heard a bad thing about their macro range.
--------------------
She (Avro Vulcan XH558) Took To The Sky Like A Lovesick Angel.
|
Mojo_66
Rain Kat
Reged: 25/05/2006
Posts: 3416
Loc: Lancs
|
|
I have the Sigma 70-300 APO lens mentioned above, and it's a great lens, plenty sharp enough and with the Sigma achromatic screw in close up lens attatched you can get 1:1 macro. There is a slight drawback in that when fully extended for close up work at the 300mm end it's a bit of a beast and would need either a tripod or higher ISO to give a fast enough shutter speed to prevent camera shake. On an APS C sensor like in the 450D it also makes a decent wildlife lens.
--------------------
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mojo_black/
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
