A New Zoom Macro Coming? [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/09/a-new-zoom-macro-coming-cr1/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/09/a-new-zoom-macro-coming-cr1/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>From the land of weird

</strong>I received an email today outlining a new macro lens that Canon has in the pipeline and could be released in the next year.</p>
<p>It will be a 1:1 zoom macro, with an aperture of f/4 and IS. No mention of the focal length for the lens. I’m reminded of the now discontinued Nikkor 70-170mm f/4.5-5.6D as a zoom 1:1 macro we’ve seen in the past. A replacement to the 180 f/3.5L perhaps?</p>
<p>A huge grain of salt with this one.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[ahsanford]

If true, perhaps it's like the much-maligned (yet brilliant!) 24-70 F/4 IS macro mode, in which the macro only works on the 70mm end?

Stupid question that I still want an answer to: Is it possible to have a 1x magnification at more than one focal length in the same lens?

- A

 

[Albi86]

The real question is: what is the advantage of a zoom compared to its long end prime?

 

[mackguyver]

A huge grain of salt with this one.

That's understatement! It sure sounds like an odd idea, especially for 1:1, but if it were parfocal, maybe. A zoom fisheye seemed odd, too (Tokina aside) until the 8-15, so who knows...

 

[Drizzt321]

If true, perhaps it's like the much-maligned (yet brilliant!) 24-70 F/4 IS macro mode, in which the macro only works on the 70mm end?

Stupid question that I still want an answer to: Is it possible to have a 1x magnification at more than one focal length in the same lens?

- A

Well, they could in theory have a build-in adjustable extension tube that automatically adjusts when in Macro to maintain 1:1 at all focal lengths. Of course, it'd be way cooler if it was free to be at any position so we could get >1:1 magnification at the shorter focal lengths if we wanted. Being cynical, that wouldn't happen because Canon would want another $$$ to 'enable' that feature on a lens because then it's >1:1 so they can charge more.

 

[ahsanford]

The real question is: what is the advantage of a zoom compared to its long end prime?

In the choice of a standard zoom vs. standard prime, with a prime you usually can just move your feet to frame. From what little tripod macro work I've done (as with landscape work on a cliff or prominent vista), some times you can't get the framing right by just moving the tripod or moving your feet -- you need another lens or you need a zoom.

So I see value in this if you shoot a lot of macro, but I'm not a whiz in this arena. I have the 100L and the 24-70 F/4 IS and I use both for much more than macro.

- A

 

[Loswr]

Well, the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro is a macro zoom lens.

 

[RGF]

If true, perhaps it's like the much-maligned (yet brilliant!) 24-70 F/4 IS macro mode, in which the macro only works on the 70mm end?

Stupid question that I still want an answer to: Is it possible to have a 1x magnification at more than one focal length in the same lens?

- A

Well, they could in theory have a build-in adjustable extension tube that automatically adjusts when in Macro to maintain 1:1 at all focal lengths. Of course, it'd be way cooler if it was free to be at any position so we could get >1:1 magnification at the shorter focal lengths if we wanted. Being cynical, that wouldn't happen because Canon would want another $$$ to 'enable' that feature on a lens because then it's >1:1 so they can charge more.

Even if they could do this, what would the IQ be? Macro tend to be incredibly sharp - could a macro zoom meet this hurdle?

I would like to see a 180-200 macro with Tilt capabilities (don't need shift). That would help with DOF which is very narrow at magnification

 

[ahsanford]

Well, the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro is a macro zoom lens.

Hell, I always forget that duckbill platypus of a lens. What a weird piece of kit that is.

- A

 

[RGF]

Well, the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro is a macro zoom lens.

what is the zoom range? I thought that this was a fixed focual lens and magnification zoom was due to moving in closer to the subject

 

[Loswr]

I would like to see a 180-200 macro with Tilt capabilities (don't need shift). That would help with DOF which is very narrow at magnification

Probably not as much as you'd think, though.

Privatebydesign quite effectively explained the reasons, so I'll just copy/paste from that post:

Only if the subject is two dimensional, after all tilting doesn't increase dof, it just moves the plane of focus. For instance the ubiquitous fly's eye macro image would gain nothing from tilting.

I am not saying Canon can't or won't do it, they do love their tilt, and macro lenses and combining them would be yet another "because we can" 17mm TS-E moment, but I highly doubt it. Apart from the above mentioned practical use with three dimensional objects there is the MAJOR issue of the J distance and the tilt angle needed at macro distances.

This all falls into the area of Harold Merklinger and his seminal work "How To Focus The View Camera", Everybody, normally with a "knowledgeable" smile, talks of Scheimpflug and his principle, but the really useful guy for us as photographers is Merklinger and his J Point and Hinge Line. See here for a couple of cool gif's and more info http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/using_tilt.html

Basically the longer the focal length the more tilt you need for the same effect, AND, and this is the really important bit for a potential macro tilt lens use, the closer the camera is to the plane of focus the more tilt you need. Bear in mind a 90mm TS-E needs 36º of tilt with a J distance of 6", current Canon T/S lenses have 8º of tilt.

 

[ahsanford]

Well, the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro is a macro zoom lens.

what is the zoom range? 65 to 330?

The 65mm is really a misnomer with that lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-MP-E-65mm-1-5x-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx

From that link (read more, of course): "Canon lists the focal length for this lens as 65mm. It is, but disregard this number for all intents and purposes. Think 1x to 5x magnification. Think 1:1 to 5:1. This lens starts where typical macro lenses stop."

It's a nutty 5:1 macro magnification. You'd use it to shoot flies' eyeballs, circuit board details, human hairs, etc. DOF is comically small from what I've read, and it really pushes you to need macro focusing rails, meticulously groom your lighting, stack your focus, all that. I won't touch that kind of specialized/'engineered' photography with a ten foot pole, but some folks love it.

- A

 

[Blaze]

Well, the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro is a macro zoom lens.

what is the zoom range? 65 to 330?

The 65mm is really a misnomer with that lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-MP-E-65mm-1-5x-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx

From that link (read more, of course): "Canon lists the focal length for this lens as 65mm. It is, but disregard this number for all intents and purposes. Think 1x to 5x magnification. Think 1:1 to 5:1. This lens starts where typical macro lenses stop."

It's a nutty 5:1 macro magnification. You'd use it to shoot flies' eyeballs, circuit board details, human hairs, etc. DOF is comically small from what I've read, and it really pushes you to need macro focusing rails, meticulously groom your lighting, stack your focus, all that. I won't touch that kind of specialized/'engineered' photography with a ten foot pole, but some folks love it.

- A

I have that lens and it's not quite as nutty as you make it seem. It's definitely a challenge, but you can do quite well even without focusing rails and focus stacking.

For those interested in macro shooting with the MP-E 65mm, I highly recommend reading LordV's hints and tips: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807056

 

[Loswr]

...you can do quite well even without focusing rails and focus stacking.

Indeed. These were shot handheld with the MP-E 65mm.


EOS 5D Mark II, MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro @ 5x, 1/60 s, f/11, ISO 400, MT-24EX


EOS 5D Mark II, MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro @ 4x, 1/60 s, f/11, ISO 400, MT-24EX

 

[RGF]

I would like to see a 180-200 macro with Tilt capabilities (don't need shift). That would help with DOF which is very narrow at magnification

Probably not as much as you'd think, though.

Thanks. Interesting and valuable

 

[Daniel Flather]

Where's the new TSE 45mm f4 1:2 macro?

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Already had a Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 Macro. Magnification was only 0.5X when 300mm, and 95 cm away from the object. Thinking of something cheaper than 180L, a hypothetical 70-300mm or 150-300mm would be able to focus to 60 cm from the object, and get "life size" 1X magnification. It seems like a safe working distance to not scare insects, and not wet the lens when make photos of "splash".

 

[lol]

I'd like to have a zoom macro for the same reasons I like regular zooms. Something in the short tele range would be ok, say, 50-100mm? f/4 is no problem since most of the time most will stop down to have any depth of field, although AF will not be possible as you get close to 1:1. But again for a macro that is ok. Ideally it would be parfocal throughout the range so you don't need to refocus as you zoom. A change in magnification is ok, although my sleep deprived mind is telling me that then isn't going to be 1:1 through the range, unless wider angles will allow you to focus closer.

I already have the MP-E65 but I don't like the varying focal point as you adjust and other laws of physics really getting in the way.

 

[jrista]

Well, the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro is a macro zoom lens.

what is the zoom range? 65 to 330?

The 65mm is really a misnomer with that lens:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-MP-E-65mm-1-5x-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx

From that link (read more, of course): "Canon lists the focal length for this lens as 65mm. It is, but disregard this number for all intents and purposes. Think 1x to 5x magnification. Think 1:1 to 5:1. This lens starts where typical macro lenses stop."

It's a nutty 5:1 macro magnification. You'd use it to shoot flies' eyeballs, circuit board details, human hairs, etc. DOF is comically small from what I've read, and it really pushes you to need macro focusing rails, meticulously groom your lighting, stack your focus, all that. I won't touch that kind of specialized/'engineered' photography with a ten foot pole, but some folks love it.

- A

Hmm, sounds like someone who has never used the lens! You are really putting it in bad light, but it isn't even a fraction as bad as that. It is a high magnification macro lens, that's all. It is a lens with built in adjustable extension, so you can get REALLY CLOSE (which is what macro is all about!!!)

You don't really need all that extra stuff either...focusing rails, meticulously groomed lighting, focus stacking, and "all that". I have followed a number of excellent macro photographers for years who use that lens HAND HELD at 4-5x zoom! It's all about technique, and simply HAVING light (it doesn't necessarily need to be groomed).

For example, try this guy's work and tutorials on for size. Prolific MP-E shooter, hand held with a little bit of technique and "bait" (or just the right time of day). He's been published in a couple well known photography magazines:

http://dalantech.deviantart.com/gallery/4122501

It is a total myth that this lens is some kind of nutty, unwieldy, difficult to use lens requiring a host of additionally quirky equipment to use right.

 

[Seta]

First of all; most new macro lens designs change focal length when they work at 1:1; otherwise the lens would be bigger .

The 180mm becomes a 120mm (ish)
The 100mm becomes a 65mm (ish)
The 60mm becomes a 38mm (ish)

This is easy to calculate adding extension tubes; for a 50mm lens you need to add 50mm extension to add 1X more magnification

The MP-E is 65mm at 1:1 and becomes a 38mm (ish) at 5:1; if the lens was 65mm all the way it would be huge

Saying that and as I macro photographer I could not care less about a macro zoom; this is the kind of lens non macro photographers would buy.

What macro photographers really need is a long due revision of the MP-E; a 0.5-5X range would be more usefull and the lens needs a round aperture and cone shaped tip (like the old Olympus 38mm bellows lens)

I know dalantech work, was one of the first macro photographers I followed but for best results focus stacking is necessary, both because difraction limits resolution and thin DOF

You can see some of my work here http://www.flickr.com/photos/seta666/ but check other people as John Hallmen (best field macro photographer I know of) and Nikola Rhame too