Couple of nice damselfly's

I shot these photos this weekend. If you look at the second photo you'll notice a fly in the damselfly's mouth.
Canon T2i + Tamron 90 mm.

IMG_2842-2_1024.jpg


IMG_2859_1024.jpg
 
Jul 21, 2010
31,228
13,089
HeavenHell said:
That's a real cool shot neuroanatomist. I need some experience with motion shots....you've inspired me. ;)

Thanks!

The cool thing about dragonflies is that they are wait-and-pounce hunters, so they will find a perch and sit for a while, then fly, then return to that same perch. So, you set up your tripod, focus, and wait...then SHOOT.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,228
13,089
DJL329 said:
Actually, on a 1.6x crop body (like the 50D), the EF 50 f/2.5 would have an equivalent focal length of 80mm, which would give it more "reach" than the EF-S 60mm.

Ummm...actually, no. Not only no, but NO.

I suspect you are suffering from a (rather common) misconception, that EF-S lenses have a focal length that is somehow 'adjusted' for an APS-C sensor. That is not the case. Focal length, by definition, is the physical distance from the rear nodal point of a lens to the image plane. In other words, a lens marked 50mm has a focal length of 50mm, and a lens marked 60mm has a focal length of 60mm (ignoring focus breathing) - regardless of the size of the sensor behind that lens, or even whether there is a camera there at all. Focal length is focal length - it's an intrinsic property of a lens. Canon made a 60mm lens with a focal length of 60mm, they didn't make a lens with a focal length of 37.5mm then lie and print 60mm on the barrel.

So...the EF-S 60mm will have more 'reach' than the EF 50mm (10mm more reach, to be exact) regardless of the camera on which it's mounted. The EF 50mm delivers a FF-equivalent AoV of 80mm on 1.6x, and the EF-S 60mm gives a FF-equivalent AoV of 96mm on 1.6x. It's just that EF-S lenses can only mount on APS-C bodies, whereas EF lenses can mount on any body.
 
Upvote 0
Neuro, it is just that the EF-S 60mm has a quoted max. magnification of 1.0x whereas the cheaper EF 50mm f/2.5 has a figure of 0.5x (so I guess we should just use the reciprocal values i.e. 50mm macro has a max reproduction ratio of 1:2 whilst the EF-S 60 enjoys 1:1)

Looking at the prices, obviously the EF-S 60mm has USM with FTM override, but the cheaper 50 f/2.5 doesn't. So fast AF is probably why jimmy156 prefers that particular lens on his crop body (very similar to 100mm macro on FF), plus the 60mm has the edge on the min focus distance too - by a whisker
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,228
13,089
DB said:
Neuro, it is just that the EF-S 60mm has a quoted max. magnification of 1.0x whereas the cheaper EF 50mm f/2.5 has a figure of 0.5x (so I guess we should just use the reciprocal values i.e. 50mm macro has a max reproduction ratio of 1:2 whilst the EF-S 60 enjoys 1:1)

True...but that has nothing to do with the focal length, per se, which was what DJL329 was talking about. I agree that the EF-S 60mm is a much better lens for APS-C users than the EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, for many reasons.
 
Upvote 0

DJL329

EOS R5
CR Pro
Aug 26, 2010
623
90
www.flickr.com
neuroanatomist said:
In other words, a lens marked 50mm has a focal length of 50mm, and a lens marked 60mm has a focal length of 60mm ... - regardless of the size of the sensor behind that lens...

I knew that, so I don't know what I was thinking. That's what I get for posting when not properly caffeinated... :p
 
Upvote 0
DB said:
Wow! Great shot...from only 1-foot away too, amazing it didn't fly away. It seems those macro lenses really do the job.

@ jimmy156 what made you opt for the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 over the 50mm f/2.5? was just the extra reach?

Thanks! It did fly away, many times ;D , persistance paid off though!

The main thing that made me opt for the 60mm was that it was bought for me as a surprise birthday present by my other half! It is however superior to the 50mm 2.5 macro in many way, 1:1 focuing, construction, AF to name a few!.
 
Upvote 0