Hi
With the birding a little quiet at the moment, I have been getting more and more into butteflies and especially the photography side of things. I am currently using a Canon 500d with a Canon F4 300mm lens and hopefully getting some pleasing results. Just out of interest what is a good Macro lens to get? I have attached a few shots from the last few days/weeks, mainly taken in East Blean Woods and Reculver. More can be seen on my blog: http://www.marcheath.blogspot.com
Marc Heath
A Few Butterflies from Kent
- Marc Heath
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 9:01 pm
Re: A Few Butterflies from Kent
A very good set Marc. I particularly like the first image..... very "clean".
As for a macro lens, I chose the Canon 100L f2.8 IS USM after much research and opinion gathering on a photography forum. The lens consistently produces excellent results and the IS is particularly useful for handheld shooting. It is a little expensive, but I think it's the best and is a lifetime purchase.
If you need to take a look at some example images using this lens take a look at my Flickr butterfly set http://www.flickr.com/photos/nigpd/sets ... 850963854/
As for a macro lens, I chose the Canon 100L f2.8 IS USM after much research and opinion gathering on a photography forum. The lens consistently produces excellent results and the IS is particularly useful for handheld shooting. It is a little expensive, but I think it's the best and is a lifetime purchase.
If you need to take a look at some example images using this lens take a look at my Flickr butterfly set http://www.flickr.com/photos/nigpd/sets ... 850963854/
Re: A Few Butterflies from Kent
Judging by those pics, you're doing a great job with the 300mm! I often use my (Nikon) 70-300mm zoom to get initial shots and then, if the butterfly is benign, move in with my 90mm Tamron macro.Marc Heath wrote:what is a good Macro lens to get?
While longer focal length macros (eg 200mm) are often recommended for butterflies, a closer approach does result in a more '3-dimensional' image (long focal lengths tend to flatten perspective). So, since you already have the 300mm, I would suggest a macro in the 100mm range. I believe Canon do a good one and I am very satisfied with my Tamron. Going shorter than 90mm would probably mean that you'd have to get closer than most living creatures will allow, and lighting also becomes a problem if you are very close.
Hope that helps.
Mike
- Gruditch
- Moderator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 1689
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:30 pm
- Location: Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: A Few Butterflies from Kent
Don't know what Mike's on about there.MikeOxon wrote: a closer approach does result in a more '3-dimensional' image (long focal lengths tend to flatten perspective).
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/icon_confused.gif)
Hi Marc, After using you 300 F4 you will probably hate the working distance of a 100 macro. Are you using an extension tube.
Regards Gruditch
- Marc Heath
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 9:01 pm
Re: A Few Butterflies from Kent
Hi
I just use the Canon 300mm lens, I do have a Canon 1.4 converter which i put on for birding but as forthe butterflies, just the 300mm. I can get to within about 1.5 metres range of them with this lens. How close does a 100mm macro let you get then in real life and are you always scaring the target away by getting too close?
Marc
I just use the Canon 300mm lens, I do have a Canon 1.4 converter which i put on for birding but as forthe butterflies, just the 300mm. I can get to within about 1.5 metres range of them with this lens. How close does a 100mm macro let you get then in real life and are you always scaring the target away by getting too close?
Marc
Re: A Few Butterflies from Kent
When I have pics of the same butterfly with the 300mm and the 90mm, I find that I almost always prefer the closer shot. Perhaps it's just a matter of taste or the greater sense of achievement!Gruditch wrote:Don't know what Mike's on about there.![]()
Mike