"Wrong" lenses

[eccles]

In recent discussions about what's the best lens to use for butterflies the invariable solution quoted, at least for DSLR users, is some sort of macro lens. But quite often, the right lens happens to be whatever's stuck on your camera. When looking for reach, I flex my somewhat insignificant biceps and lug around the 70-400mm zoom. If this lens was a little lighter, except for very small butterflies, for which the macro lens is more suitable, I'd hardly ever take it off the camera. And if you think that's odd, check out the exif data on Gary's (gruditch) recently posted rather nice brown hairstreak in the sightings threads. Anyone else use a non-standard lens for butterflies?
Oh yes, I almost forgot this, taken with the aforementioned zoom:

[Dave McCormick]

I used a Canon 18-200 IS lens a few times, not much good for butterflies, but with the IS on it, if you don't have time to change lenses, its alright and better quality than the standard Canon 18-55mm, guess the IS does that cause the quality is better in the 18-55 IS than older 18-55 without IS.

Here is one such shot I managed to get with the 18-200mm, I was taking a photo of a forest I was in with 18-200mm and found this on underside of an old creamery roof and did not have time to change lenses so shot this. Looks ok on this shot, but in full shot, it looks out of focus if you zoom to the full size of the image. BTW, does anyone know what this moth is? Taken with flash on and image was sharpened slightly:



eccles, about your camera lens there, after seeing that great shot, I'd agree with you fully about the quality there, in smaller critters, definatly need a macro. Thats the problem usually, best macro lenses are fixed sizes. While we are on subject, does anyone know a sharp, good quality zoom macro that can give as good as shot as Sigma EX DG Macro lenses or Tamron 90mm? Cause thats sometimes the problem, you can't zoom into your subject, you have to walk closer to it first.

[eccles]

I refer the honourable member to the comments I made a few moments ago.

[Dave McCormick]

Yeah, good point, with shots like that, it can be just as good as a macro

[Gruditch]

I love my Sigma 150 Macro, if I was asked for advise on what lens to get, ( for photographing butterflies ) I would recommend a macro, preferably a long one 90mm plus.
But I must admit I prefer my 100-400, I also some times use my Canon 24-105 F/4L IS, with a Canon 500 close up lens.
Using the 100-400 does take a bit of practise, but found I can use it with even the smaller species.

Gruditch

[Pete Eeles]

Using the 100-400 does take a bit of practise, but found I can use it with even the smaller species.

Presumably with a teleconverter?

Cheers,

- Pete

[Gruditch]

No with a Canon extension tube.

Gruditch

[rolf]

My Olympus 70-300 lens which is nearly always on the camera, will focus down to 1m so OK (but not perfect)for most butterfly shots, but also for bird, action and general wildlife shots. For really close work I have an Olympus extension tube.

[eccles]

with a Canon 500 close up lens.

I didn't know you had one. I've been using and recommending one of these for ages. Good aren't they?

I sometimes use a 1.4x teleconverter with my 70-400 zoom but only when I really need the reach with semi-static subjects. With an f5.6 maximum aperture reduced by the TC to f8, AF hunts often and manual focus isn't all that easy because of the long focal length and razor thin DOF. I would imagine Gary's 100-400 to be difficult as well for the same reasons. I haven't tried an extension tube with it - will have to give it a go.

Nice shots Rolf.

[xmilehigh]

If I was only allowed 2 lenses it would have to be the 70-400 & 100mm Macro.

Taken with the Sony 70-400mm @ 400mm


Excellent Swallow shot Rolf

Cheers

[Gruditch]

I've found that the extension tube works best with the 100-400, you can't go to infinity, and the zoom will only focus from 250mm - 400mm, but photography is all about compromises.

I like the 500 close up lens on the 24-105, the limited working distance feels right on that smaller lens. But on the 100-400 I think it nullified the benefits of it's greater working distance.

I often use a x1.4 converter on my 150mm Macro, makes it a 210mm at F/4. Primes and fast zooms ( F/2.8 ) is where the TC's are best used.


Gruditch

[NickB]

Not really into zooms for butterfly work and concentrating on primes. Would use tubes for telephoto work ....
Traded-in my poor 28-300mm Sigma "macro" to help fund a 2nd hand 200mm Nikkor f4 Macro...
(Just missing a decent 300mm .....and a positive bank balance )
N

[xmilehigh]

MMMmmmmmmmmmm 200mm Macro ~ Drool (Homer Simpson type noises)

[NickB]

yes...... ....you can imagine how slobbery I am!
I pick it up tomorrow....
N
(I drool over an FX body.....poverty may beckon but I would like the Nikon D700 FX.......imagine the Nikkor 200m macro on that!)

[eccles]

I shot a family event at the local nature reserve today, but took time out to find a few insects as well.
This was shot with the bog standard 18-70 kit lens:

and this one with the 70-210 zoom:

[Gruditch]

The Sigma 28-300 is a particularly poor lens, your asking a lot of a lens to cover that focal length and be top quality, sold mine too.
I was not surprised to hear at the last Photography Workshop, that two of the presenters Maurice and David both regularly shoot Butterflies using 300mm primes.

Gruditch

[NickB]

.... that two of the presenters Maurice and David both regularly shoot Butterflies using 300mm primes.
Gruditch

....With extension tubes.....
N
Not that kit lenses are useless...
Examples from Nikkor DX 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens....

[Lee Hurrell]

All this lens talk is fascinating, especially as I am yet to buy mine! (Sigma 150mm macro I think I've decided, maybe by the photo workshop....)

Excuse the potentially idiot question but what's the difference between prime and macro?

Thanks

Lee

[Pete Eeles]

Excuse the potentially idiot question but what's the difference between prime and macro?

These are different characteristics:

A prime lens has a fixed focal length. i.e. it's not a zoom lens.

A macro lens (in simple terms) makes small things look large, rather than large things (like landscapes and people) look small.

In theory, you could have a macro prime lens, a macro zoom lens, a non-macro prime lens and a non-macro zoom lens.

I'm not aware of anyone using a macro zoom lens.

Cheers,

- Pete

[Lee Hurrell]

Thanks Pete, I'm learning slowly!

That makes the Canon 24-85mm that came with the camera a non macro zoom then.

For some reason I was thinking the Sigma 150mm macro was a zoom as well.

Right, back to my research...

Cheers

Lee