If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
The new Tamron 60mm f/2 macro
"Troy Piggins" wrote in message ... * Ofnuts wrote : Neil Harrington wrote: I definitely absolutely positively want one of these. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/as...optest_909.pdf Canon has a 60mm macro too in its EF-S range (for APS-C cameras), and it's seldom mentioned in Canon forums, where everyone seems to use the 100mm Canon, or similar lenses from Tamron/Sigma. What are the benefits of a 60mm lens for macro work? And of an f/2 aperture when shallow depth of field is a usually a problem? I've come across a dentist how uses a 60mm macro lens for dental work shots. Something to do with closer working distance in his confined office space. He wouldn't have been shooting 1:1, but still the difference in focal lengths and focusing distances was enough for it to matter. Agree about the f/2. You would virtually never be shooting macro at f/2.8 let alone f/2 Macro lenses can be and frequently are used for other things than macro work. They are generally exceptionally sharp, distortion-free and have flat fields. These are very useful qualities for all sorts of photography. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
The new Tamron 60mm f/2 macro
Neil Harrington wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message ... Neil Harrington wrote: "Alan Browne" wrote in message ... Neil Harrington wrote: I definitely absolutely positively want one of these. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/as...optest_909.pdf It's abilities aside, the working distance with short (50-60mm) macros blocks a lot of ambient light... Not with this one, according to Tamron. They say its working distance is about equal to that of the longer macro lenses. The front element is right up front, rather than deeply recessed as it is on my Tamron 90 and Tokina 100. On my Minolta it is deeply recessed EXCEPT when taking macro. Then it's way out there. On both my Tamron 90mm and Tokina 100mm macro lenses, the front element is deeply recessed in the barrel and that doesn't change a millimeter as it goes from infinity to 1:1. When I say deeply recessed I mean about 30 mm on the Tokina and about 40 mm on the Tamron. I think we've had this conversation before.... I just checked my Minolta 100mm f/2.8 macro and focus @ 1:1 is at about 340mm from the film plane. Lots of room to get light on the subject. Per dpreview the "working distance" at 1:1 of the 60mm Tamron is 100mm which I assume is from the front element. More likely the lens barrel, but since the Tamron 60's front element is right up front there probably isn't much difference. That means the camera is closer, so more ambient light is blocked (esp. considering the photographer's head). Well, if the photographer's head still needs to be there when the shot is taken it might block *some* light but I don't think very much. It seems unlikely that the light source would be behind his head in most cases. Even with the lens I describe above, I've had some lighting issues along the trail here and there. So metering with the head down, then getting away to allow more light ... er, was the exposure locked?... Anyway, you're comparing two different measurements. You say your Minolta 100 reaches 1:1 focus 340 mm from the film plane, but that tells nothing about working distance. True enough but I was more concerned with light and how close my hands have to be to thing that bite and sting! The working distance is about 12 - 13 cm from the front element. Trying it just now with my Tokina 100, focused at 1:1 the subject is about 310 mm from the focal plane and the working distance (i.e., to the front of the lens barrel) is about 110 mm. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
The new Tamron 60mm f/2 macro
"Alan Browne" wrote in message ... Neil Harrington wrote: "Alan Browne" wrote in message ... Neil Harrington wrote: "Alan Browne" wrote in message ... Neil Harrington wrote: I definitely absolutely positively want one of these. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/as...optest_909.pdf It's abilities aside, the working distance with short (50-60mm) macros blocks a lot of ambient light... Not with this one, according to Tamron. They say its working distance is about equal to that of the longer macro lenses. The front element is right up front, rather than deeply recessed as it is on my Tamron 90 and Tokina 100. On my Minolta it is deeply recessed EXCEPT when taking macro. Then it's way out there. On both my Tamron 90mm and Tokina 100mm macro lenses, the front element is deeply recessed in the barrel and that doesn't change a millimeter as it goes from infinity to 1:1. When I say deeply recessed I mean about 30 mm on the Tokina and about 40 mm on the Tamron. I think we've had this conversation before.... It seems somehow familiar to me, too, though I didn't recall who it was with. I just checked my Minolta 100mm f/2.8 macro and focus @ 1:1 is at about 340mm from the film plane. Lots of room to get light on the subject. Per dpreview the "working distance" at 1:1 of the 60mm Tamron is 100mm which I assume is from the front element. More likely the lens barrel, but since the Tamron 60's front element is right up front there probably isn't much difference. That means the camera is closer, so more ambient light is blocked (esp. considering the photographer's head). Well, if the photographer's head still needs to be there when the shot is taken it might block *some* light but I don't think very much. It seems unlikely that the light source would be behind his head in most cases. Even with the lens I describe above, I've had some lighting issues along the trail here and there. So metering with the head down, then getting away to allow more light ... er, was the exposure locked?... Could be, or the eyepiece could be capped. In my case most macro stuff has been done indoors, and what I have done outdoors the lighting arrangement just hasn't been a bother.. Anyway, you're comparing two different measurements. You say your Minolta 100 reaches 1:1 focus 340 mm from the film plane, but that tells nothing about working distance. True enough but I was more concerned with light and how close my hands have to be to thing that bite and sting! The working distance is about 12 - 13 cm from the front element. Trying it just now with my Tokina 100, focused at 1:1 the subject is about 310 mm from the focal plane and the working distance (i.e., to the front of the lens barrel) is about 110 mm. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New Tamron 60mm macro for APS-C cameras | Neil Harrington[_3_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | May 8th 09 05:50 PM |
Tamron 60mm f/2 macro | Paul Furman | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | April 26th 09 08:23 AM |
Canon EF 50mm 50 F2.5 Macro vs EF-S 60mm F2.8 Macro USM Lens | cameraproblem | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1 | December 5th 06 06:45 PM |
New Canon EF-S 60mm F2.8 Macro? | grenner | Digital Photography | 26 | April 4th 05 12:27 AM |
Canon EF-S 60mm macro | [email protected] | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | February 20th 05 02:40 PM |