OT: macro camera lens and help

[Dave B]

I know many of you know loads about cameras as well as photography. I have a cannon rebel eos t3 and it doesn't decent job for the family. I am interested in taking up close photos of stuff and have read a macro lens is what I am looking for.

When I search I get macro lens for the eos t3i and am curious if they fit the t3. Additionally what is a decent lens that isn't going to break the bank? Anything decent under $200? I am not a professional, but wanted to do some stuff with finger print pictures for my students.

Any guidance or if anyone has one to sell would be great.



Thanks folks

[ergott]

Price is a bit more, but the Canon Ef-S 60mm macro is a top rated lens. Does 1:1 macro and image quality is superb. Another option is the 50mm 2.5 macro, but you don't get full 1:1 without add on. Both will work with your camera body. Any lens that fits the t3i will fit your t3.

[pzung]

I find that the macro picture mode of any small DSC seems to do a better job than many of the more expensive DSLR lenses. You might want to spend more time/$ on the lighting and possibly a small macro tent to keep the background lighting under control

[rnhood]

For taking pictures of finger prints you will probably be better served by an extension tube or tube set. You don't have a lighting issue and with finger prints you need fairly extreme close up.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008MBDUOM?psc=1

Keep in mind however, you often have to fine tune the focus manually even though some of these extension tubes are advertised as auto-focus compatible. But they do a very good job when plenty of light is available, and you are setting up for the picture. If you need a macro for traveling then a macro lens is perhaps the best option - albeit at a much higher price.

[bcroslin]

You can pick up a reverse lens mount adapter cheap to get you started in macro photography. Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=canon+reverse+mount&tag=googhydr-20&index=aps&hvadid=6317861181&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=12645495570453065540&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=t&ref=pd_sl_1esv925w03_b) link

[Dave B]

Thank you some things to look at for sure, want to do some up close nature stuff for the kids as well. Identification games and so on.

Will find something that works

[ergott]

The Canon 60mm macro is also a terrific lens for other types of shooting. It's particularly good for portraits.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_s_60mm_f_2_8_macro_usm

Look for a used one and save some money.

[tuxbailey]

If you have some kind of 70-200/70-300 mm lens you can try the Canon 500D macro adapter. It works fairy well without breaking the bank. You might need a stop down adapter to have it fit to your lens. But they have different thread sizes of the lens.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-500D-77mm-Close-Lens/dp/B00009XVDB

[Dave B]

I am fully aware that typically, not always the more you pay the better it is.

How different or how bad are the cheap lenses you see on eBay, like this for example. Is there truly a significant difference?


http://www.ebay.com/itm/231129216797?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


Is it worth the money to get a bunch of stuff to play around with?

I am not taking professional quality pictures now anyway, but don't want to blow cash just to have more crap to fiddle with. Relating it to a bike is this the NEXT brand Walmart version and would it do the job?

Thanks

[ergott]

Honestly, I can't tell what that lens does based on the description. 58mm focal length is not a wide angle or fish eye, but them mention some sort of add on. The decimals make me think they reduce the focal length respectively, but I can't imagine the results are any good. I participate on a photography forum as well and never saw mention of that.

[tuxbailey]

I am fully aware that typically, not always the more you pay the better it is.

How different or how bad are the cheap lenses you see on eBay, like this for example. Is there truly a significant difference?


http://www.ebay.com/itm/231129216797?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


Is it worth the money to get a bunch of stuff to play around with?

I am not taking professional quality pictures now anyway, but don't want to blow cash just to have more crap to fiddle with. Relating it to a bike is this the NEXT brand Walmart version and would it do the job?

Thanks

I think if you are going to go that route, you might as well buy the 50mm f1.8 and add some Kenko extension tubes to get macro capability. It is not 1:1 but I have seen good results.

[false_Aest]

The cheapest option is to buy a diopter -- screws on to the front of your lens. Think of it as a magnifying glass for your lens. There are really cheap ones and some nice ones (achromatic doublets).

[Vinci]

The cheapest option is to buy a diopter -- screws on to the front of your lens. Think of it as a magnifying glass for your lens. There are really cheap ones and some nice ones (achromatic doublets).
I had a set of these (Hoya) while I had my DSLR. They did a great job of close detail photos on a standard zoom lens.

[CaliFly]

The kit you posted will probably end up driving you nuts.

For macro work, fine adjustments are the name of the game...which means you want a rail. Yes, it will be a bit more money. But in the long run, you will get more gratification out of it combined with a quality macro lens (60mm or 100mm).

[IFRider]

I found 60mm too short a lens for outside. Needing to get really close limits it to things that don't move. I also found that being so close often messed with lighting options.

My true macro is a 105 which gives nice working distance and is a nice lens length for portraits on Full Frame. I also have a couple of lenses with "macro capability" that do all right (35-70/2.8). I also have had excellent luck with a diopter (Canon in fact) on a 80-200/2.8 AFS lense. The thing with macro is it really is about patience and manual focus works great. You can look for older versions of excellent lenses (check photo.net forums for Canon specific information).

If you are not concerned about accuracy (low distortion), I would go diopters and play around. Sounds like you are taking pictures of nature for students to identify, so I would say that is more than find.

The hardcore macro guys use rails, tilt shift and other things the industry does not focus on these days so a lot of it is used/ebay type stuff.

[staggerwing]

I've shot close-ups for years, mainly for laboratory documentation.

You will first need to decide what kind of magnification ratios you are after, and how close you can get to your subject.

As noted, for just getting started, buy an inexpensive set of close-up diopters to fit your primary lens. BH Photo has a multi-coated Hoya set (+1, +2 and +4) for under $40, in most sizes, which will be fine. They are the exact same as single element +diopters your see in reading glasses. They will work best on a fixed, 'normal' focal length lens, like the ubiquitous 50mm. Screw one on the working end, set focus to manual, and closest distance, and move the camera back and forth to achieve focus. The diopters offset the closest focusing distance of the lens. Auto focus is just about useless for true macro work.

For more serious exploration, up to say 1:1 repro, a fixed focal length macro lens is the way to go. Canon, Nikon, and the other majors will typically have one around 50-60mm, another around 100mm, and perhaps one at a longer focal length. In the Nikon world, both the older, manual 55, and newer 60 AF are optically excellent, but require you to be very close to the subject for anything close to 1:1. I mainly use mine for flat-field copy stand work, and for filming tests. The 100mm range lenses are more useful for true close-up work, just due to increased working distance. Apparently, this is not a difficult optical design, as third party manufactures (Tamron, Tokina and Sigma) also make optically wonderful macro lenses in that range. If you keep your eyes peeled, you may luck into an older Tamron 90 macro in your $200 limit.

[SoCalSteve]

The cheapest option is to buy a diopter -- screws on to the front of your lens. Think of it as a magnifying glass for your lens. There are really cheap ones and some nice ones (achromatic doublets).

Listen to this guy. He knows photography.

[Dave B]

Thank you all for this. I don't understand most of what you guys are talking about,
But this is good as now I can focus research, which I admit I love to obsess over. If any of you have suggestions for forums where newbies can learn loads I would appreciate it. Summer vacation starts at 2:45 tomorrow and after my boy's surgery I am going to have loads of free time! Woohoo!

Dave

[staggerwing]

Sure, Philip Greenspun's creation, photo.net, is a good place to spend some time. They even have a macro entry, http://photo.net/learn/macro/, which was written by Philip back in 1997. All images are clickable for larger versions. As an aside, photo.net is one of the early (1993), large scale, database backed web sites for public interaction.

The diopter closeup filters we are talking about screw onto the front of your lens, just like a typical skylight or polarizer filter. Unlike most filters, they have an optical power correction, which, for lack of better terminology, adjusts the range over which the lens is capable of focusing.

No harm in just mucking about a bit, as you are only burning pixels. In days past, we had to wait for the slides to be developed.

[Saint Vitus]

+1 on what staggerwing has said and I'll double up on the Tamron 90mm. In the Adaptall mount it cannot be beat for cost to performance ratio.