Macro lens differences - does focal length matter
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 вер 2024
- How do differing focal lengths affect the 'look' of a particular focal length macro lens. Is a longer focal length more useful, or do wider angle lenses look better.
Based on Keith's recent reviews of the very similar Laowa 58mm f/2.8 2x and 90mm f/2.8 2x full frame macro lenses for mirrorless cameras.
See also
www.northlight...
and
www.northlight...
-----------------
If you'd like to make a small donation, I have a Kofi page:
"Buy me a coffee" ko-fi.com/keit...
-----------------
My articles and videos are always free to access.
Any help with running this channel is gratefully received.
-----------------
I also have some affiliate links which earn me a commission if used.
US Amazon photo/print gear: amzn.to/3l9vJC6
B&H Photo: www.bhphotovid...
Adorama: www.adorama.co...
Huh... you actually convinced me to get a wider angle lens for macro. That 58mm shot looks so much better than the 90mm
Glad it was of interest
This was one of those things where I had just assumed the differences would not be so obvious.
@@KeithCooper Yes indeed! I have to be frank, I am seeing why some movies (birdman for example) like to use wide angle lenses. It is so much more immersive and the background are so much more interesting. It feels as it the frog will jump out of the screen. Compared to the longer focal length, where everything looks flatter.
On Canon, my most used macro lens is a Sigma, F2.8, stabilised, 180mm. I wanted the focal length, this was the only stabilised choice. I have used the MP-E 65 on occasion. I should try both on my S1R. On Olympus, it's 60mm. OM Systems has promised a very nice 90mm. There's a video on Look Closer featuring a mob of photographers chasing spiders armed wiht Olympus cameras ((net very new ones, to my surprise) and the 60mm macro lens. I think you will enjoy it. Karen too.
MP-E65 for most of my commercial work...
Excellent as usual Keith. As an aside have you ever tried achromats (true achromats not the cheap things) on the front of a zoom. Tremendous fun and the results can be stunning and its a cheap way to get into true macro work.
Not seen one of the better ones - I've a few cheap ones found at a junk sale. the proper ones are the sort of stuff I only tend to try if someone lends it to me.
You will notice that few of my articles/reviews involve me spending any money - there is a good reason for that :-(
Thanks, but there of course other options. If I can get very close to the subject, I use the Olympus TG-5, which has a minimum focusing distance (MFD) of about 1cm, so you can practically contact the subject! The LED Light Guide provides all the illumination you need with no worries about shadows or flash. In-camera focus stacking and auto-bracketing give you all sorts of choices and you can get up to 7x optical magnification (with quite good IQ). If the subject is skittish or potentially harmful (or getting close just isn't practical), I use my Lumix G9 and Leica 100-400. With an MFD of 1.3m (4.27') and an EFL of up to 800mm, I get an effective magnification (EM) of 0.5x, enough to more than fill the frame with things like dragonflies or butterflies. For anything between those extremes, I use the Olympus 60mm f/2.8 Macro, which has an MFD of 19cm (7.5") and up to 2x EM. IQ with both of those lenses is beyond reproach and all these options can deliver pin-sharp detail of things like an insect's compound eyes. Before getting such capable macro gear, I'd considered things like extension tubes but I can't imagine them providing better results--I wonder of they could be used in combination for even higher magnification (but I'm not sure how useful that would be)... Anyway, I just wanted to mention some of the alternatives to larger (than necessary, IMO) format gear.
Of course - this video is not at all suggesting any particular solutions for macro work, but just addressing the question someone asked me about what difference focal length made, in light of the two otherwise very similar macro lenses I looked at (58mm and 90mm)
I have been doing photography (Gold jewellery and diamonds), I am doing it for one year now by using my mobile phone camera, and I am getting good details with my mobile phone but now I am thinking to upgrade to a mirrorless camera, my main motive while taking photos is to get the most details (i-e patterns inside gems and diamonds), what will you suggest me to purchase, I am looking to buy a lens that can achieve the details with sharpness as well as I could use it to take daily routine photos but I can compromise the quality of daily casual photos but it should perform best for my professional work. Kindly suggest me some lens, I am planning to use the Lens with Cannon EOS RP which has RF mount. Please guide me to make a good purchase.
The key is in the use of the lens rather than the lens itself - I'd suggest the Laowa 90mm, BUT you will need to learn all about manual exposure.
However that's the key to good macro/product photography anyway, so will need addressing.
See the detail in my main [written] review
www.northlight-images.co.uk/90mm-2x-macro-laowa/
@@KeithCooper thanks so much, I am familiar with manual exposure as I have been doing it on my phone, I use manual exposure on my phone to take photos. Thanks so much for replying to me 💕
Have you tested IBIS setting for macro photography. fx if you use the 90 mm macro, for handholm use, could it be better to set the IBIS at a longer focal length than 90mm for macro distances ?
No - main reason is that I d not own a camera with IBIS :-)
Donations always welcome...
I'm going to start photographing Infrastructure . Is 1X enough for details or should I invest in a 2X 90mm?
Just what is infrastructure?
To me it includes bridges and roads - hardly something for macro...
@@KeithCooper There is details in infrastructure and not only panorama pictures
That still doesn't really tell me anything about what you mean?
Photographing what?
@@KeithCooper Details in Electrical transmissions and distribution grids, Machine parts and so on,
Hardly macro - close-up maybe