Lens recommendations

[NickC]

Hi, I'm new to butterfly photography and I'm looking for lens recommendations. My main passion is aviation, and I've been photographing aircraft for many years. Therefore I already own an EOS30D DSLR and a variety of lenses ranging from an EF-S 17-85mm to an EF 100-400 L. I've used the latter for a few attempts at butterfly photography and I'm reasonably pleased with the results; but I clearly have some way to go to match the quality of many of the shots on here. I used the EF 100-400 L because it meant I didn't have to get too close, to avoid spooking the subjects! I see though that many of the shots on here appear to be shot quite close, possibly with macro lenses, is that the case? Perhaps I need to practice sneaking up on butterflies as well as sorting out a suitable lens. Anyway, I'm grateful for any advice, and with a birthday and Christmas approaching a new lens purchase is a possibility ready for next year.

[dilettante]

I'm not a Canon shooter, so can't advise on Canon lenses although I've heard nothing but good things about the Canon 100 L macro. But my preferred butterfly lens is a Tamron 180mm/f3.5 macro, which gives ideal working distance and good optical performance. The narrow field of view also makes it easier to isolate your subject against an uncluttered background, like this sort of thing:



I'd have thought you'd be able to get similar results with your 100-400L if it focuses close enough.

There's also something to be said for shorter focal lengths, if you can get close enough to your subjects. Some of my favourite shots have been taken with a cheap Sigma 24mm. A combination of wide angle and close focus means you can show the subject and its environment.

[Paul Wetton]

Hello Nick and welcome to the forum.

I personally would recommend a macro lens for butterflies. I use a Sigma 150mm macro which allows shots to be taken from a little further away than some of the other macros. This is the non IS version which I purchased second hand on EBay for around £300. Sigma have recently launched a new lens with image stabilser which probably retails at £800 - £900. This lens was discussed on this forum possibly from the Birdfair.

My advice would be to take your 30D with battery charged and card installed and test some lenses out. Even in the shops you can photograph butterfly sized objects with each lens and download the photos and see which you prefer.

I would still recommend Sigma unless you have sufficient money to purchase a Canon IS macro lens but these are much more expensive. They do appear to give slightly better colours and sharper images in dull light when the subject is blowing around in the wind. I cannot compare to the new Sigma though as I have not seen it.

Go and have a play and see what you prefer.

[Paul Wetton]

Just a note on wide angle and close up shots.
This is a practice that should not ne performed when with others who are taking shots from distance.
This is a sure fire way to lose your photographic buddies when you scare away at least 50% of what you are stalking.
I like Guys attitude to this. His approach is to let everyone else take their shots or video before getting in close and if he moves the subject along three times he leaves it alone to prevent further disturbance.

[Nick Broomer]

hi nickc

i also use a sigma 150mm macro lens. it allows you to shoot at distance or close-up, and gives you a very sharp image. would recommend it to anyone.

good luck.

hideandseek.

[MikeOxon]

Your current tele-zoom should be excellent for flighty butterflies and for initial shots, before stalking to get closer. I have no doubt, however, that a macro lens will always give better results, providing the butterfly allows a close approach.

I use a 90mm Tamron macro, which is around the minimum focal length that you can use with live subjects. I also sometimes use a 1.4x teleconverter to get a longer working distance. The 180mm Tamron macro has a stellar reputation and offers a longer working distance, at the expense of greater size and weight.

I notice from this forum that many users get excellent results from Lumix FZ series cameras. These small-sensor all-in-ones have the advantages of great portability and excellent macro performance. The small sensor can also be a advantage in that it gives a greater depth of field for any given aperture setting - useful in macro work. The disadvantage is noise performance but butterflies are usually bright-light, fine-weather subjects, so this need not be a limitation. These cameras cost less than a macro lens fora DSLR!

Mike

[NickC]

Thanks everyone for the replies. Looks like a longer length macro would be a good choice (comments regarding disturbing others duly noted).

[GOLDENORFE]

I would recomend the canon 100mm macro, it is much easier to hand hold and get sharp shots compared to the heavy 150. its easy enough to get close to most butterflys and you will not need as high shutterspeed compared to the longer focal length to prevent motion blur!

phil

[Paul Wetton]

The Canon L series and new Sigma OS seem to come in at a similar price of £650 to £700.

Again I would suggest you try them all out and go for which gives you the best results with your camera body.

To be honest I've never had a problem hand holding the Sima non OS version and neither has my other half who uses it now. There will always be occasions when the light is low and motion blur can occur in which case the Canon may be best but I don't think motion blur is purely down to weight as a lighter lens can move just as easily in the hand when depressing the shutter release. Sometimes there is less movement with a weightier lens.

Please let us know how you fair with your search and good luck finding the lens that suits you the best.

[Michaeljf]

I would recomend the canon 100mm macro phil

I use Canon cameras and use a 100mm canon most of the time and also use an EF12 extension tube which helps me to get the butterfly to fill the frame - I would certainly suggest the 100mm canon macro. While I'm sure the new Image-Stabilisation canon is great I don't know that it's essential. Although I haven't tried a Sigma-canon fit lens for the macro I have used other Sigma-fit lenses and they are very good.

Keep in mind also that some of the best images on here probably have some post-production work on them to bring out the best qualities. Not that I'd do that, as I'm fairly incompetent with photoshop

Michael

[Willrow]

As a 'dyed in the wool' Nikon man I'm not sure I'm doing the right thing getting involved in a discussion with so many Canon 'BIG SHOTS' so I shall keep it brief and mention just two things.

1.) Buy the very best glass you can afford, no one ever regrets it.

2.) Check out the very best current prices on http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk

You've been given some sound advice above Nick, but whatever you decide to buy - good luck and have fun!!!

Bill

[Rogerdodge]

Nick
You can use your 100-400 very effectively.
Don't forget that the best butterfly photos are rarely the wing tip to wing tip, full frame, in your face shots.
If you do need to "get in closer" then a simple extension tube will suffice. You lose a little light, and the autofocus may no longer work, but many people don't use autofocus for macro anyway. They come usually as a group of 3, and the larger one on it's own will be fine. Make sure they have the electric contacts to pass information to and from the camera.

If you do want a specialist lens, you are really spoilt for choice. I have an old 180mm Sigma which has given me many perfectly sharp photographs over the years, and is a very robust lens. It is no longer made however, but the Canon 180mm is, and is wonderful, but quite expensive.
Sigma really put the cat amongst the pigeons when the introduced the unique 150mm Macro a few years back. I have used one extensively, and it is wonderful - really sharp, and the f2.8 gives a brighter viewfinder and it is easier to focus than the 180 as the shallower dof of the 2.8 compared to the 180s f3.5 makes the subject really snap in and out of focus. A great lens, and, up until a few months ago, would have been my ideal replacement for the old 180.

However - Canon then bought out the IS (image stabilised) version of the superb 100 macro. Now, that is a little shorter than I would have liked, but the IS really works, and, as a Canon L lens is just superb in every department.

And then I got hands on with the new Sigma 150 Macro with OS (Sigmas version of IS). What a fabulous lens. The ideal (IMHO) focal length, bombproof build quality, and superb OS.

Just to give you more food for thought - Tamron do a 180 Macro that I hear very good reports about.

You have a very tricky decision to make. The best bit of advice is to buy the best you can afford. I have a cupboard full of virtually unused "bargain" lenses - and the only lenses I use regularly are the expensive ones. They are expensive for a reason!!.

Good luck, and do let us know what you decide.

[Gruditch]

I have a Sigma 150, and a Tamron 180, both superb lenses. But my preferred set up for butterfly work, is the Canon 100-400, with a Canon 25mm extension tube. ( About a dozen pictures in my gallery were taken using this set up ). It gives a massive working distance, you get IS, and with this extension tube you can still use AF. The only drew back is the minimum working distance can sometimes catch you out.

All that said, every photographer should have a decent macro at their disposal, if I was buying again I would probably go for the new Sigma 150 OS.

Regards Gruditch

[NickC]

Thanks very much everybody for the responses - very informative indeed. I've decided to see how I get on next year with my 100-400L, both on its own and with an extension tube (which I'll be buying shortly). It makes sense seeing as I already have the lens. If I feel I'm missing shots due to a lack of a macro then I'll buy one, but I'll see how I get on first. I'll be looking out for events publicised on here too, with the aim of tagging along to pick up tips from you lot!

Nick.

[JKT]

Canon 100-400, with a Canon 25mm extension tube. ...The only drew back is the minimum working distance can sometimes catch you out.

That's surprising. I would think you'd get pretty close at the 100 mm setting. Anybody care to test the magnification ratio?

[Gruditch]

With the tube attached, it will only focus from 400mm down to 250mm.

I've also tried it with Canon close up lens, but I hated the restricted working distance.

Regards Gruditch

[JKT]

It does restrict that. I tend to use 100 mm macro for moths and that is pretty much always combined with 32 mm extension. The maximum distance is enough for pretty large ones and the minimum allows quite small ones. MP-E 65 can't handle the larger ones.

I would have thought using different focal lengths with the extension would allow you to change the possible magnification ratios as the tube should be more effective with the shorter focal length. It can be quite tricky though - you'd need to play with both the focal length and focus while you get closer to subject. Well, it should be that way. Can't test as I don't have the 100-400. Were the values 250...400 for minimum focus at f=100 and infinity focus at f=400?

[Gruditch]

You lost me, all I know it it will only focus between about 30ft and 4ft, and you can't focus at all under 250mm.

Regards Gruditch

[JKT]

I guess that worked both ways.

Do you mean that it doesn't auto-focus under 250 mm setting or is there something preventing manual focus too? I didn't think of that possibility as I do all the macros with manual focus.

[Gruditch]

Won't focus in manual or AF, under 250mm.

Regards Gruditch