chuckbradley Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I have a Cannon EOS Rebel XT . It has the original 18-55 lense I need a lense that I can take up close pics of small parts. I dont want to spend a fortune on a lense. Can somebody give me an option or two since I dont know what to look for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Here's a pic of some closeup I did with the 18-55 that is on my Canon Digital Rebel. ISO 100, 1/4sec, f6. @ 50mm. It was done on a tripod using the timer and no flash. Photoshop probably could aid in a few areas, depending on the level of detail or closeness you're looking for. A good prime macro lens for cheap might be a 50mm f2.5 macro. Those can be had for ~$125 when I looked very quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Try: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/103-0...amp;x=0&y=0 You might also look at the Fred Miranda classifieds: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10 Another item to consider is the "kit" 28-135 IS lenses that everyone is selling for $225 - $325. It's a super lens, has decent macro capability, and is very useful for things besides close ups. I sure like mine. I have no idea why everyone's dumping theirs, but you should easily be able to pick one up in great shape for $250 right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek45 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 These guys have been helpful ... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ I have an old PENTAX macro lens, don't know much about the Canon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckbradley Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 Here's a pic of some closeup I did with the 18-55 that is on my Canon Digital Rebel. ISO 100, 1/4sec, f6. @ 50mm. It was done on a tripod using the timer and no flash. Photoshop probably could aid in a few areas, depending on the level of detail or closeness you're looking for.A good prime macro lens for cheap might be a 50mm f2.5 macro. Those can be had for ~$125 when I looked very quickly. That pic is what I want to do. Guess I just need a lesson in photography. I just use auto focus now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek45 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I have an PENTAX K110D, DSLR. It also came with an 18-55 lens. I set my camera to MARCO ( instead of auto, or outdoor, etc...) pulled way in until the auto focus couldn't, ...and slowly pulled the gun away till it would auto-focus. Here's the result..... It's not as close as a good macro, but good enough for serial numbers etc. hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Chuck, one of the professional tricks is to switch to manual focus, turn the focusing ring to the closest distance, and then slowly move the camera toward/away from the object until it appears critically sharp. Then freeze, and release the shutter as if you were shooting 50 yard partials with iron sights. The good news about digital is that you can take a ton of images, and look for the sharpest one on the computer --- if you don't have enough light to get a fast shutter speed, the center frames of a motordriven burst are often sharper than the first and last, which are disturbed more by pressing and releasing the shutter.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Chuck, Do you need to shoot an occasional part over time or do you have a lot of product you want taken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 For pictures of small items, a macro is really the thing. Canon makes three - the 100mm Macro lens is probably the best value, in the. Highly regarded for high image quality, and not real expensive (in the grand scheme of lenses). It also doubles nicely as a portrait lens. There are other lenses that have macro capability (which really just means "real close focusing distance" in most of them). A lens that's designed for macro work is really going to serve you better than one where close focusing distance was tacked on as an afterthought. Nik is giving you some good thoughts on using it. A tripod is another good option... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cztn Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 +1 for the Canon 100 macro lens. Great picture quality for the money. Also look at the Tamron 90 macro. Have played around with it and the picture quality is also very good but not quite as much money as the Canon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Sierpina Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I use a Sigma 105mm Macro. Price is reasonble for a lens that doesn't get used a lot. A tripod would be highly recommended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 For pictures of small items, a macro is really the thing. Canon makes three - the 100mm Macro lens is probably the best value, in the. Highly regarded for high image quality, and not real expensive (in the grand scheme of lenses). It also doubles nicely as a portrait lens.There are other lenses that have macro capability (which really just means "real close focusing distance" in most of them). A lens that's designed for macro work is really going to serve you better than one where close focusing distance was tacked on as an afterthought. Nik is giving you some good thoughts on using it. A tripod is another good option... The 50mm macro is certainly cheapest --- but also has the closest working distance for any given magnification, which often makes lighting the object harder. The longer the macro lenses get, i.e. 100 mm or 180 mm, the greater the working distance can be, which allows you to sneak light in more easily. And at the distances we're talking about, it's entirely possible for the photog to throw the object into the shadows.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckbradley Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 I do use a tripod and a light tent. Dont take too many pics as I tend to steal pics from the manufacturers web pages when I can. I see lenses that are one size 50mm or 100mm. What about the lenses that say 28-300mm. Is that a viable choice. Like this one- Sigma 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 Macro Zoom Lens Actually I just played with manual focus and I might be able to stay with what I have but if the others will be much better I may get one. I just took this pic on my desk with no special light, off hand. Seems to be good enough but Nick is right about shadow. If the others will let me use a tripod it might be worth it. This just happens to be the barrel for my new carry gun project. Oh yea, I hate 50 yrd standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveU Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 I do use a tripod and a light tent. Dont take too many pics as I tend to steal pics from the manufacturers web pages when I can. I see lenses that are one size 50mm or 100mm. What about the lenses that say 28-300mm. Is that a viable choice. Like this one- Sigma 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 Macro Zoom Lens Actually I just played with manual focus and I might be able to stay with what I have but if the others will be much better I may get one. I just took this pic on my desk with no special light, off hand. Seems to be good enough but Nick is right about shadow. If the others will let me use a tripod it might be worth it. This just happens to be the barrel for my new carry gun project. Oh yea, I hate 50 yrd standards. Chuck: The lenses with a focal length range are zoom lenses. You can take a standard shot or dial up to a telephoto shot. Generally good quality zoom lenses are expensive to make and high quality ones are pricier. The "one size" are simply that: You can't zoom in and out with them. Though they are less versatile, but good quality ones are less expensive to make. You should be able to take any picture you want with the lens you have with that camera. It's a very good camera and it's the one I'm going to buy (when rest my checkbook after paying you and Shaun for my limited build, that is...) - Just need to play with the lighting and use the "macro focus" settings, as others have posted. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Chuck, the biggest difference between the zooms and the fixed macro lenses is the amount of magnification that can be obtained: The 50 can get you to 1/2 life size, where an image of a one inch long item would take up 1/2 an inch of a 35 mm negative, and the 100 mm can get you to 1:1. The zooms will be hard pressed to get to 1/4 life size. So, if you need the ultimate in sharpness or magnification, for reproduction in a printed catalog, or for significant enlargement, there's the difference. If you're just shooting for the webpage, I'd start working on technique first, and only buy a macro when I had exhausted all other options. (It's more Indian than Arrow, but if you need the ultimate quality then the arrow comes into play...) Now, the digital cameras have a sensor that's smaller than a 35 mm negative, and I never measured any of this stuff to determine the effect in the digital world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckbradley Posted January 11, 2008 Author Share Posted January 11, 2008 Thanks guys. Looks as if I will stay with what I got. I just need to learn my camera. I dont think I ever cracked open the users manual. You know the thing we only use as a last resort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 It takes some technique to make macro work. You'll need lots of light, a tight f-stop (try f16), and a tripod. It's very difficult to get the depth of field and proper illumination you need without the mondo lighting packages like Yamil uses. A remote handheld flash unit can be a big help in getting rid of nuisance shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 (edited) If you're mounting the camera on a tripod then you will also need a cable release or set the shutter release delay in the camera so it goes off 2 seconds after the button is pressed, that will stop any camera shake. That and a good light box and you should be good to go. Take your pictures with the highest pixel rate and then crop and down-size for posting to the web. Edited January 11, 2008 by BritinUSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted January 11, 2008 Share Posted January 11, 2008 Go to an art supply store and buy sections of poster board, cell board, whatever the hell they call it in your area. Foamcore, whatever. It is glossy white laminate on both sides, with a thin core of stiff foam. Cut it to one foot, one and a half, or two foot squares. Use small spring clamps to stand them up, and they will reflect whatever light you have back into the picture. If you really need a macro, I've got a Sigma 50mm f2.8 EX series lying around here some place. Its a good lens but when I got a line on a Canon 180 macro, I jumped on it. So the little 50 doesn't get much use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now