SAVING

A forum to ask questions, post setups, and generally discuss anything having to do with photomacrography and photomicroscopy.

Moderators: MacroMike, nzmacro, Ken Ramos, twebster, S. Alden

Locked
User avatar
nephiliim
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:38 am
Contact:

SAVING

Post by nephiliim »

Hey folks..

Just wanted to let you know that I am saving up my money now.. i wanna buy the eos 20D 18-70 kit and a sigma 50 mm macrolens.

:lol:

All the best,

Tom B
Sometimes smaller is better!
*nodge nodge :D*

Comments and advice always welcome
My little website

User avatar
nzmacro
Site Admin
Posts: 1604
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 1:25 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Post by nzmacro »

Great to see and its a great goal to aim for Tom. Good on ya :D :wink: Ahh, any chance you might get a 100mm macro instead of the 50mm ???. Just curious.

All the best Tom, very pleased down here :D

Danny.

User avatar
nephiliim
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:38 am
Contact:

Post by nephiliim »

I don't know Danny, I once borrowed a tamron 70-300 with macro from my boss and it is quite hard to get rightly placed focus. I don't know for sure how the 100 mm will workj out, but the 50 mm has a minimum focus distance of aprox. 19 cm. Witch is just far enough for me.

All the best,

Tom B
Sometimes smaller is better!
*nodge nodge :D*

Comments and advice always welcome
My little website

User avatar
MikeBinOKlahoma
Posts: 1491
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Umm....Could it be Oklahoma?

Post by MikeBinOKlahoma »

On my first attempt at macro photography, I was so frustrated with failure to get the sharp depth-of-field where I wanted it that I didn't try again for a year (seriously!). However, once I went back to it, I did pretty well at it! Patience and not giving up is the key.

I suspect you'll not be happy with a 50mm lens for macro shots of insects, even on a 20D (which gives the illusion of more focal length). I am pretty sure the focusing range listed is a range from the film plane (sensor, in your case) to the insect, and the actual distance from the front of the lens to the insect would be much less. Many insects are very intolerant of you getting close, especially the glamor-girl butterflies, dragonflies, and damselflies.

I suggest a 100mm lens (or more). The Canon 100mm or Sigma 105mm are the obvious choices. A very good, but cheaper option is the Vivitar 100/3.5 macro (often sold under the brand name Phoenix). I owned one as my main macro lens for about a year, and was pleased with it. Image quality is excellent when stopped down as you are for macro. Build quality was not so good, but good enough. Only major disadvantage of the lens is that it will go on it's own to just 1:2 image size. You can get 1:1 image size by putting an included diopter on the front of the lens. The diopter screws on like a filter, and reduces the focusing distance some.

I highly recommend the lens if you're on a budget, and it sells for well below half what the Canon or Sigma versions go for.
Mike Broderick
_____________________________________________________________
"I must obey the inscrutable exhortations of my soul.....My mandate includes weird bugs."--Calvin

(reposts on this site of my images for critique or instruction are welcome)

User avatar
S. Alden
Site Admin
Posts: 2780
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:25 am
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Contact:

Post by S. Alden »

I have the 20D and a 50mm and 100mm Macro. I would take that 100mm Macro any day over that 50 for macro images. Go for the 100, you will not reqret it.
Sue Alden
Administrator
Repost of my images are welcome

User avatar
nephiliim
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:38 am
Contact:

Post by nephiliim »

Guess I will have to save up a bit more money then :D

It's a bit of a thing with me, I don't want to buy cheap alternates and save up money just a bit longer, guess I will be going for the sigma 105 then :lol:

Thank you both for your advice on this,

All the best,

Tom B
Sometimes smaller is better!
*nodge nodge :D*

Comments and advice always welcome
My little website

User avatar
nephiliim
Posts: 546
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:38 am
Contact:

Post by nephiliim »

Hey folks,

Another question for you,

Which flash is more adviseable a Canon MT-24EX twin-lite or a Sigma EM-140 DG ringflasher?
I don't care much about difference in price you know I want good stuff.

I havent's found any qualitycamparison sites that enable you to compare these two, let alone to view comments by people that use either of them.

Does anyone have experience with either of these flashes or have another way.. like sideflashing with a detached "normal" flash.

All the best,

Tom B
Sometimes smaller is better!
*nodge nodge :D*

Comments and advice always welcome
My little website

rjlittlefield
Posts: 727
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 11:57 pm
Location: Richland, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

nephiliim wrote:Does anyone have experience with either of these flashes or have another way.. like sideflashing with a detached "normal" flash.
I sideflash.

In more detail, I use an ancient off-brand strobe in full manual mode, handholding the flash at wherever position makes sense -- typically just at the end of the lens, but left, right, above, below, 10 o'clock, whatever seems most likely to model the subject well. See my aphids and the last round of frost spikes for examples of the results.

Why ancient & full manual? Because when I bought my Canon 300D system, a couple of years ago, I discovered that it had some deficiencies in its flash metering and control, such that all the fancy new auto flashes just flat failed (bad exposures) when used with my funky full manual lens systems. I went through three models of new auto flash units before realizing (duh!) that full manual is just fine for what I do, given the instant feedback of digital photos. It has the pleasant side effect that my whole flash system fits in a Ziploc sandwich bag that's easy to pack.

I am not recommending this scheme, just describing it. It works good for me, but it has some clear deficiencies and I'm sure there are a zillion dependencies against what I do and how I do it, that I haven't even thought about.

--Rik

Locked