woooo, scored a macro lens

[troytime]

a kiron 70-210 f/4 macro, which is probably older than I am

i can't wait to get it and see how it performs!

 

[AndrewR]

What mount? Never heard of Kiron before, but I don't delve much into 3rd party lenses. 🙂

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Hate the break it to ya, but the lens is most likely not a true macro. True macro is defined as a 1:1 magnification, meaning the image projected on the sensor by the lens is the same size as the object in real life. So the image of a 5mm long fly would actually be 5mm long as projected on the sensor. Some manufacturers have this thing going where they slap "macro" on a lens that can only do 1:2 magnification, meaning a 5mm long fly would be 2.5mm on the image sensor, so not as much magnification as 1:1. Basically it's not a true macro lens. The Sigma 70-300mm Macro does this. The 70-210mm is going to very likely do this as well. Generally, true macros are never zooms, with the exception of the Canon MP-E 65mm and probably a few other specialty lenses here and there.

But for $20, whatever.

 

[troytime]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Hate the break it to ya, but the lens is most likely not a true macro. True macro is defined as a 1:1 magnification, meaning the image projected on the sensor by the lens is the same size as the object in real life. So the image of a 5mm long fly would actually be 5mm long as projected on the sensor. Some manufacturers have this thing going where they slap "macro" on a lens that can only do 1:2 magnification, meaning a 5mm long fly would be 2.5mm on the image sensor, so not as much magnification as 1:1. Basically it's not a true macro lens. The Sigma 70-300mm Macro does this. The 70-210mm is going to very likely do this as well. Generally, true macros are never zooms, with the exception of the Canon MP-E 65mm and probably a few other specialty lenses here and there.

But for $20, whatever.

i'm aware, but for my budget, and my skill level, its better than close up filters 🙂
plus it will do 1:1 with a small extension tube (if i read correctly)

i plan to get a prime macro eventually (when my skills and budget allow it)

 

[yhelothar]

70-210 is a pretty fun starter lens to play with, especially at that price.
But for true budget macro, I would recommend just getting any normal cheap prime, and getting extension tubes for it.

Make sure you use flash for your really close up macros, so you can use a small aperture.
Here's two I did with the 50mm F/1.4 with a set of extension tubes..
ants
beetle

 

[troytime]

Originally posted by: astroidea
70-210 is a pretty fun starter lens to play with, especially at that price.
But for true budget macro, I would recommend just getting any normal cheap prime, and getting extension tubes for it.

Make sure you use flash for your really close up macros, so you can use a small aperture.
Here's two I did with the 50mm F/1.4 with a set of extension tubes..
ants
beetle

Those are both really good!
I have a 50mm 1.8 just itchin for some extension tubes.

but, they're 120 bucks...and i can get a phoenix 100mm macro for less than a hundred (not by much though)

i'm torn, and poor

edit: did you use a ringflash? regular flash? speedlight? diffuser?

 

[AndrewR]

I don't have experience with extension tubes, but from what I've read, you can use them on a variety of lenses. So, I'd think you'd be better off getting them with the 50mm with the option to use them with other lenses down the road, as opposed to spending (wasting!) money on a Phoenix lens.

If you can't a decent flash (wireless system works best if you can't get a ringflash/macro flash system), then get a purpose built reflector (<$40) or even just some white foamcore. On camera flashes are very limited for macro work.