I don't disagree - but its a feature that doesn't have to be used all the time. Depending on how flexible it is on what part of the LED array you can use, it has the potential to be very handy (especially in the field).
An RF mount L macro lens will be announced alongside the high-megapixel EOS R camera
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
True! There’s certainly been times when I’ve needed a bit of extra light but didn’t bring flashes and diffusers with me. Would be handy for focusing too!
It has the additional advantage of not being blocked by the lens, no matter what.
The LEDs on the current macro lenses are really only good out to about 12” / 30 cm at best. Perhaps an LED on a new RF macro would be more powerful, but I definitely would not expect it to replace a flash. Not even close.
Have you tried the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 OS (=IS)? I had one and although I had to return it due to a damaged AF unit, it produced really excellent images. A native Canon would presumably be even better but much more expensive.
Yes, that is a downside. Depends how much time you have and how much storage you want to use (if I'm doing loads of moths, say, in a short space of time, I tend to increase the DOF to save both).
Never tried that lens but heard good things. I use a canon 100-400 ii for those kind of shots now though!
As for me, a 250mm f/4 or f/5.6 with an MFD of 75 cm or larger would be the best. But an EF-S 60mm f/2.8 IS USM with at least 2 stops stabilization would also be good.
I'm not really interested either in built-in ring light or larger than f/2.8 aperture as I'm used to take my shots at f/8 or f/9 and sometimes – if the subject is relatively big and I can have a larger working distance – at f/5.6 or so.
I don't think that focus stacking is really that important as the larger the magnification you have to use the smaller the subject is. I have a front-view shot of a small weevil – about 3 mm – and with the EF-S 60 mm and the 25 mm extension tube I have almost the complete beetle in focus with f/8 while it almost completely fills the frame (the photo).
As for the definitions: 10:1 or larger is micro. Between 1:1 and 10:1 it is macro. From 1:2 to 1:1 you can call it close-up. Smaller than 1:2 is just a regular photo with something small in it. It's not macro and not even close up.
And at last just a theoretical question: would a macro zoom lens with at least 1:1 magnification ration in any focal range be possible? Because a RF 60-180mm (or 70-200mm) f/2.8 IS USM macro only – from 2.5:1 to 1:1 magnification ratio – would really be unique.
I'm not really interested either in built-in ring light or larger than f/2.8 aperture as I'm used to take my shots at f/8 or f/9 and sometimes – if the subject is relatively big and I can have a larger working distance – at f/5.6 or so.
I don't think that focus stacking is really that important as the larger the magnification you have to use the smaller the subject is. I have a front-view shot of a small weevil – about 3 mm – and with the EF-S 60 mm and the 25 mm extension tube I have almost the complete beetle in focus with f/8 while it almost completely fills the frame (the photo).
As for the definitions: 10:1 or larger is micro. Between 1:1 and 10:1 it is macro. From 1:2 to 1:1 you can call it close-up. Smaller than 1:2 is just a regular photo with something small in it. It's not macro and not even close up.
And at last just a theoretical question: would a macro zoom lens with at least 1:1 magnification ration in any focal range be possible? Because a RF 60-180mm (or 70-200mm) f/2.8 IS USM macro only – from 2.5:1 to 1:1 magnification ratio – would really be unique.
The EF 100mm isn't 100mm at macro distance, more like 70mm, so a zoom would probably be even worse.As for me, a 250mm f/4 or f/5.6 with an MFD of 75 cm or larger would be the best. But an EF-S 60mm f/2.8 IS USM with at least 2 stops stabilization would also be good.
I'm not really interested either in built-in ring light or larger than f/2.8 aperture as I'm used to take my shots at f/8 or f/9 and sometimes – if the subject is relatively big and I can have a larger working distance – at f/5.6 or so.
I don't think that focus stacking is really that important as the larger the magnification you have to use the smaller the subject is. I have a front-view shot of a small weevil – about 3 mm – and with the EF-S 60 mm and the 25 mm extension tube I have almost the complete beetle in focus with f/8 while it almost completely fills the frame (the photo).
As for the definitions: 10:1 or larger is micro. Between 1:1 and 10:1 it is macro. From 1:2 to 1:1 you can call it close-up. Smaller than 1:2 is just a regular photo with something small in it. It's not macro and not even close up.
And at last just a theoretical question: would a macro zoom lens with at least 1:1 magnification ration in any focal range be possible? Because a RF 60-180mm (or 70-200mm) f/2.8 IS USM macro only – from 2.5:1 to 1:1 magnification ratio – would really be unique.
M
Maybe the high res camera will do focus stacking automatically like the RP? Could be a reason to release a new macro lens along side it.
maybe its first focus breath free macro lense . so prolly somekind of macrozoom
This is actually macro lens convo
.Sounds like you dont want high resolution camera if want all 3 thing too .
General purpose sony A7r iv or canon 5div would suit better ,those cameras wont do compromises to get as high mpixel count as possible.