# WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHERS 50mm 1.4 with close up filters vs dedicated macro???



## MonteGraham (Sep 22, 2013)

50mm 1.4 with close up filters vs dedicated macro lens for wedding close up of ring, flowers, shoes etc...


----------



## surapon (Sep 23, 2013)

MonteGraham said:


> 50mm 1.4 with close up filters vs dedicated macro lens for wedding close up of ring, flowers, shoes etc...



Dear MonteGraham.
Just my Idea, If you have Macro lens, Please use Macro lens for Close up Photos for super sharp photos, But If you Have only 50 mm 1.4, Please go to buy the Extension Tube = very cheap , and use with your 50 mm 1.4 to get closer focus and get the bigger / closer details of the subject/ objects.
I have 3-4 Close up Filters and try 10 years ago, I do not like the Not sharp at the edges of the pictures.
Good luck
Surapon

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/375102-REG/Kenko_AEXTUBEDGC_Auto_Extension_Tube_Set.html


----------



## Nishi Drew (Sep 23, 2013)

I've been using a 50mm 1.4 with extension tubes for macro and it gets the job done. Though is a pain to setup each time with the manual setting of the aperture with stop down button, the loss of light and lack of AF can be dealt with but it's extra time taken. I borrowed a macro lens for another wedding, and found that I used it more for portraits than actual macro, so personally I don't see myself getting much out of investing in a macro, an extension tube setup, or just using a lens that focuses close enough, and then cropping the image can be fine as well. Would be wise to rent/borrow a macro lens to try out once, and also, shoes don't really need macro unless you want to get the very fine detail


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 23, 2013)

Something you need to consider about closeup filters is the lack of ability to focus. you need to hold the camera at a exact distance from the subject with little tolerance for error. This can be difficult, unless you use a tripod and macro head. With a 100L, you can handhold the camera and do reasonably well.

Lighting is another issue when you get too close with that 50mm plus closeup lens, you will block most of the light.

I'd go for a extension tube if I couldn't justify a macro lens.


----------



## MonteGraham (Sep 23, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Something you need to consider about closeup filters is the lack of ability to focus. you need to hold the camera at a exact distance from the subject with little tolerance for error. This can be difficult, unless you use a tripod and macro head. With a 100L, you can handhold the camera and do reasonably well.
> 
> Lighting is another issue when you get too close with that 50mm plus closeup lens, you will block most of the light.
> 
> I'd go for a extension tube if I couldn't justify a macro lens.



thats the thing i wont be doing a lot of macro work only during pre wedding.. That isnt a justification to get 100mm. Are close up filters that bad to not use??


----------



## kphoto99 (Sep 23, 2013)

Nishi Drew said:


> I've been using a 50mm 1.4 with extension tubes for macro and it gets the job done. Though is a pain to setup each time with the manual setting of the aperture with stop down button, the loss of light and lack of AF can be dealt with but it's extra time taken.



You need to get better extension tubes, either Canon or Kenko that pass the electrical contacts. This way the camera sets the aperture and does AF.

To the OP, get a set of Kenko extension tubes and try all your lens to see which ones give you the right amount of magnification at the easy working distance. That is all you need. Do not get a magnification filters, they will reduce the quality of the image just like a tele extender does.


----------



## Dick (Sep 23, 2013)

MonteGraham said:


> 50mm 1.4 with close up filters vs dedicated macro lens for wedding close up of ring, flowers, shoes etc...



Get the 100L. It is good for other stuff too & not just the close up shots + you can trust its performance. I have shot events with just a 35mm prime and the 100L.


----------



## MonteGraham (Sep 23, 2013)

Dick said:


> MonteGraham said:
> 
> 
> > 50mm 1.4 with close up filters vs dedicated macro lens for wedding close up of ring, flowers, shoes etc...
> ...



Do you mean the standard or L version?


----------



## photonius (Sep 23, 2013)

MonteGraham said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Something you need to consider about closeup filters is the lack of ability to focus. you need to hold the camera at a exact distance from the subject with little tolerance for error. This can be difficult, unless you use a tripod and macro head. With a 100L, you can handhold the camera and do reasonably well.
> ...


Both "good" close-up lenses and extension tubes can yield good results for occasional macro.
However, single lens element close-up lenses are not good. There is a sample comparison in the close-up lens section here:
http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Close-up+%26+Macro
You would need an achromat (doublet) close-up lens to get decent quality. These lenses are actually quite hefty. Also, close-up lenses need higher power on shorter focal length lenses to get decent magnification, while extension tubes need not that much extension on 50mm to get high magnification (see also examples in the site above).

A Kenko extension tube set gives you the electronic coupling, so it's fully automatic, and you have a set of extensions that you can combine as needed to get the desired magnification range. It's probably the best choice to combine with a 50mm lens.

As pointed out, both with close-up lenses and extension tubes you loose infinity focus, the actual focus range will be severely limited so that you may end up using manual focus, or rather just move the camera back and forth until your subject is sharp.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 23, 2013)

MonteGraham said:


> Do you mean the standard or L version?



Just get the excellent non-L version which is rather cheap and you also get it used - the L has not that much better iq (sharpness ~equivalent, a bit better bokeh) and you don't seem to need the main advantages focus limiter, weather sealing and IS for handheld shooting. For me the 100L is a nice dual-use lens for portraits, but you've already got the 70-200L.


----------



## Sella174 (Sep 23, 2013)

Your signature states you have a 7D ... so buy the EF-S 60mm macro ... it's cheap-ish and good-ish enough ... it's also a nice-ish portrait lens.


----------



## MonteGraham (Sep 23, 2013)

Sella174 said:


> Your signature states you have a 7D ... so buy the EF-S 60mm macro ... it's cheap-ish and good-ish enough ... it's also a nice-ish portrait lens.




i was thinking about that lens at first glance. But during wedding ill be running 2 5DMKIII. I use my 7D more for sports and wildlife.


----------



## surapon (Sep 23, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> MonteGraham said:
> 
> 
> > Do you mean the standard or L version?
> ...



+ 1
Yes, 100 L Macro is one of the great Portrait Lens for Full Frame Sensor camera, and Great Hybrid IS. too
Yes, Super sharp Lens for Under $ 1050 US Dollars

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-100mm-Macro-Digital-Cameras/dp/B002NEGTSI

Surapon


----------



## Sella174 (Sep 23, 2013)

MonteGraham said:


> i was thinking about that lens at first glance. But during wedding ill be running 2 5DMKIII. I use my 7D more for sports and wildlife.



Advice stands ... nothing wrong with having a third camera "dedicated" for macro work. Besides, this combo (7D + 60mm) will add no more bulk than a 100mm *L* macro.


----------



## awinphoto (Sep 23, 2013)

surapon said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > MonteGraham said:
> ...



Go for the L... love that macro lens... I've tried most of the macro type of work arounds... tubes, reversed lenses, microscope mounts, etc and they all work with varying degrees but require finesse and while it's capable of doing so, A) during a wedding, mickey-mousing trying to get a shot doesn't instill a lot of trust in people who may be watching you take the photos and B) isn't as fast... Get the macro lens and be happy =)


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 23, 2013)

The only time I tried close-up filters was 30 years ago and I hated the results. I've had a macro lens in the 90-100mm range ever since. I currently use the non-L Canon macro for my staged head and shoulder portraits and macro work with a 5D3. However, most of my macro work is close enough that I use a tripod and remote release.


----------



## newallen (Sep 23, 2013)

I use the Hoya +2 and +4 sandwiched together on the 50mm 1.2 for ring shots. I assume the 1.4 would be just as good. 

I stop down to 5.6 or smaller. 

Pics here: 

http://www.allenarrickphotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/011_AAP_35221.jpg

& 

http://www.allenarrickphotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/028_AAP_9840_blog.jpg


----------



## MonteGraham (Sep 23, 2013)

awinphoto said:


> surapon said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



+1


----------



## Kernuak (Sep 23, 2013)

If you're only going to be doing occasional closeups, then I would go with a set of Kenko extension tubes. While the body is plastic, the mounts are metal and you don't lose image quality, although you will get some vignetting if you use all three (probably not necessary anyway). I haven't used my extension tubes with my 50 f/1.4, but have used them with my 100mm macro (non-L), 135mm f/2 and 24-105 at the wide end (just the shortest one for that) and they work well. I even tried with my 17-40 when I had it, but the combination was almost unuseable .


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 24, 2013)

+ 1 on a dedicated macro lens. I'm using a 100mm F2.8 USM non-L and it's enough for my uses (weddings). It's up to you though to decide but make sure you've got one since you're doing professional work. Don't sacrifice your client's satisfaction. In the long run, it'll pay off. For me, a satisfied customer will also serve as your free advertisement that will benefit you for a long time. I've got a my macro second hand and I didn't regret it. It's a very handy lens to have for macros and yes, for portraits.

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/282-tamron-af-90mm-f28-di-sp-macro-test-report--review

If you really want to go cheap, a Tamron 90mm SP is also a nice and cheap option. This is significantly better than any extension tubes and rival's Canon 100mm F2.8 USM in terms of compactness and IQ.


----------



## Chris Geiger (Sep 24, 2013)

To start with I don't like the 50mm 1.4 at all. When you are wide open it is very soft. No sharpness anywhere in the images. I had one for a time but sold it. I get much sharper results from my Sigma 85 1.4.

As to macro lens or spacers I see opinions posted here with nothing to back it up. If your going to say that a macro is better, you need to say why it is better. Frankly I don't think it is better. Are your you going to get better depth of field with a macro lens? No, are you going to get a sharper image with a macro lens? No. 

Are you really going to carry a macro lens around all day just to get a few ring shots? It takes me 30 seconds to set up a ring shot with an extension tube. I install the tube, crank up the ISO to 6400, turn the lens to F11, set manual focus and zoom my 24-70 to 70mm. Now I am ready to shoot macro and I did not have to go get a different lens.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 24, 2013)

MonteGraham said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Something you need to consider about closeup filters is the lack of ability to focus. you need to hold the camera at a exact distance from the subject with little tolerance for error. This can be difficult, unless you use a tripod and macro head. With a 100L, you can handhold the camera and do reasonably well.
> ...


 
I was assuming that you wanted to photograph something like the ring on the brides hand, which implies a hand held close shot. Holding a 50mm with close up lens still and at the exact distance needed for sharp focus might be difficult. With tubes, you can use autofocus.

For hand held shots, the 100L is really good, but its also expensive. The older 100mm USM is excellent optically, but focuses slowly and is not as easy to use handheld, but it does the job. I had the USM, and was skeptical about the "L" until I bought one. Its amazing for handheld closeup photos. The longer working distance of a 100mm lens means it does not block natural light, and a flash is easier to use.

Here is a handheld image of a bug on my front door. I saw it, grabbed my camera and snapped it handheld with on camera 580 EX II flash. I could not do that with the old USM version.


----------



## Kernuak (Sep 24, 2013)

Chris Geiger said:


> To start with I don't like the 50mm 1.4 at all. When you are wide open it is very soft. No sharpness anywhere in the images. I had one for a time but sold it. I get much sharper results from my Sigma 85 1.4.



I think for closeup shots, the need to use it wide open would be very minimal, unless going for a really arty shot, where ultimate sharpness probably isn't important anyway.



Chris Geiger said:


> As to macro lens or spacers I see opinions posted here with nothing to back it up. If your going to say that a macro is better, you need to say why it is better. Frankly I don't think it is better. Are your you going to get better depth of field with a macro lens? No, are you going to get a sharper image with a macro lens? No.



Actually, although I was suggesting extension tubes, logically, a macro lens should be sharper for closeups, as it the design is optimised for that short of work, while other primes have different compromises in thir designs. However, at teh size of images generally reproduced for weddings, the differences wouldn't really be noticeable, particularly as your average bride and groom won't be doing much pixel peeping. The question is more, "is the lens sharp enough?", not "which one is sharper?". I do have examples with my extension tubes, but not with the 50 f/1.4, so they wouldn't be of much use and for the small cost of a set of extensions tubes that could have other uses...



Chris Geiger said:


> Are you really going to carry a macro lens around all day just to get a few ring shots? It takes me 30 seconds to set up a ring shot with an extension tube. I install the tube, crank up the ISO to 6400, turn the lens to F11, set manual focus and zoom my 24-70 to 70mm. Now I am ready to shoot macro and I did not have to go get a different lens.



I make use of my macro lens, but for occasional use, I would agree.


----------

