Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Video and Photography

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    D C (dirwoody)      Join Date: Apr 2003       02-11-2009, 4:38 AM Reply   
Looking at getting my next lens. I'm currently shooting a 40D with a 28-135 IS. Big fan of shooting close-ups and macro stuff, but also want something really wide

I know these are on completely different ends of the spectrum, but I can't decide. Anybody have any thoughts about good lenses, possibly a couple less exepnsive ones to fit both roles?

Currently I've been looking at the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 15 Fisheye, but have yet to decide. what else should I be looking at?
Old    Rich Dykmans (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       02-11-2009, 8:29 AM Reply   
I'd go with the 10/22 efs over the 15mm FE.

A 15mm fish is just kind of lost on a crop body. There is also the sigma 12-24.

For the same $ spent on a 70-200 f2.8L IS and 15mm fish you could get a 70-200 f4L IS and the 10-22, that's how I'd go.
Old    RileyBangerter (steezyshots)      Join Date: Feb 2008       02-11-2009, 8:41 AM Reply   
I also love my 10/22 efs I use it more than any lens I have
Old    Thomas Deneka (tdeneka)      Join Date: Aug 2002       02-11-2009, 8:45 AM Reply   
You might want to consider this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/279582-USA/Canon_8806A002_17_40mm_f_4L_USM_Lens.html#specific ations

I bought this for the wide aspect, but it will actually do 1:4 mag for macro work, which isn't bad (the 10-22 is only 1:6). For macro, the 100mm 2.8 macro is sweet, and it will do 1:1 (and is also a great lens), but I was pleasently surprised how nice a job the 17-35 F4 did for close-up work considering how wide it is. If I remember, I will try to post up some pics when I get home.
Old    Rob VLX (skull)      Join Date: May 2002       02-11-2009, 10:12 AM Reply   
I think the Tokina 11-18 is better than the 10-22 and about $100 cheaper. That is a SICK lens IMO. I have the 11-18 and love it.
Old    D C (dirwoody)      Join Date: Apr 2003       02-11-2009, 7:12 PM Reply   
Thomas - Sorry, you're going to have to dumb it down a little for me, I'm still pretty new to the game. Not sure I understand the 1:4, 1:6, and 1:1, could you either explain this or tell me where to find a good explination?
Sorry for the dumb question
Old    Sparky Jay (wake_upppp)      Join Date: Nov 2003       02-11-2009, 8:07 PM Reply   
Darin, 1:4, 1:6, and 1:1 are refering to the magnification of the lens if I'm not mistaken. Still new here as well.
Old    Rich Dykmans (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       02-11-2009, 8:46 PM Reply   
It's the relationship of how the overall subject size wise will fit in the image plane.

A 1:1 lens, which is considered a full macro lens, will be able to close focus on an object literally as small as the physical sensor or film plane and fill the image edge to edge with that object.

Let's say for example your sensor is physically 3/4" across, if you're shooting a 1:1 macro lens you'll be able to capture an object 3/4" wide in focus and have it go edge to edge in your overall image. If it's a 1:4 lens the object will only be able to fill a 1/4 of the image frame etc etc.

Obviously when you look at your image at normal viewing sizes it's going to be way larger then the object but it's still only 1:1 because it's the physical relationship that's measured.

Magnification only occurs when the lens will go past 1:1 like the Canon mp-e 65mm which is capable of 5:1. Or if you're shooting thru an actual microscope of some type.

That relationship can be decreased with the use of extension tubes for example a 1:4 macro lens can become 1:2 or in some cases 1:1 with enough extension tubes mounted between the lens and the body.
Old    D C (dirwoody)      Join Date: Apr 2003       02-12-2009, 1:21 PM Reply   
Rich - You're a wealth of information - Thanks!
Old    Rich Dykmans (richd)      Join Date: Oct 2003       02-13-2009, 7:19 AM Reply   
No problem, there's actually some pretty complex geometry involved in how they come up with those ratios (which I don't begin to claim to understand) but for all practical purposes that's how it works.

I've got a Tamron 90 f2.8 1:1 Macro which is a lot of fun to shoot and an excellent head/shoulders portrait lens to boot. I've gotten a some good shots with the Tamron and 35mm of extension tubes on which I think gets me to about 2:1 magnification.

All of the dedicated macro primes from any of the lens companies are always extremely sharp, in fact many claim the Canon 100 Macro is the sharpest prime lens Canon makes. If you go over to the Macro forum on FM you'll see some pretty amazing images.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 4:09 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us