# When will we see a macro lens update?



## Drainpipe (Nov 14, 2017)

I know everyone is very excited about the possibility of the upcoming 50mm, but is there any love for the macros? Canon is unique in that they offer a lens design that literally no other company does in the MP-E 65mm 1x-5x, and the two 100mms and the 180mm are no slouch either. I am a huge proponent of the MP-E 65mm, and use it more than any other lens that I own. Macro is my niche, so I am 100% biased on this.

What strikes me as odd is that the macro lens designs have been around for quite some time (with the exception of the f/2.8L):


MP-E 65mm 1x-5x - *1999*
100mm f/2.8 (non-L) - *2000*
100mm f/2.8L IS - 2009
180mm f/3.5L - *1996*

The other thing that had me going is that two of the older TS-E lenses (45mm & 90mm) just saw an update in 2017, and the timeline for them is pretty similar:


TS-E 45mm 2.8 - *1991*
TS-E 90mm 2.8 - *1991*

Am I just thinking wishfully? Or is there the possibility that we could see a macro lens update in the near future? Again, the 50mm f/1.4 was released in 1993, which signals that the timeline for these lenses is nearing 25 years. 

_THOUGHT: Maybe the upcoming 50mm is an MP-E 50mm f/2.8L 1x-5x???_ ;D


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 14, 2017)

Clearly you are ignoring the Macro TS-E 135, which specifically designated a macro lens even with the modest magnification ratio.

Also the other two new TS-E's are called macro although with a 1:2 magnification ratio they don't really count I suppose.


----------



## Drainpipe (Nov 14, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Clearly you are ignoring the Macro TS-E 135, which specifically designated a macro lens even with the modest magnification ratio.
> 
> Also the other two new TS-E's are called macro although with a 1:2 magnification ratio they don't really count I suppose.



Nope, not counting any of the new TS-Es as I think they're just replacing the old and adding one new focal length for the tilt shift line. The old TS-E 90mm could do .29x, so if I add a value to its magnification does it automatically make it a macro lens? 1:2 for the new line isn't even considered "macro" by many. Yes, it is designated as such, but 1:1 is usually considered necessity for a "true" macro lens. 

Could the TS-Es be great macros with extension tubes? Of course. I'm actually really looking forward to trying one out with extension tubes to see if I can replace the MP-E. Doubtful, but who knows :

I'm more interested in the "true" macros if that makes sense.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Nov 14, 2017)

AF is not a concern to you, is it? If not, why not a third party lens? None of the current offerings appeal to me, but if Sigma came out with a 2X 200mm, I would likely buy it.

Regarding the MP-E, does it need an update? I am somewhat interested in it, but I see no reviews. What would you have improved?



Drainpipe said:


> I know everyone is very excited about the possibility of the upcoming 50mm, but is there any love for the macros? Canon is unique in that they offer a lens design that literally no other company does in the MP-E 65mm 1x-5x, and the two 100mms and the 180mm are no slouch either. I am a huge proponent of the MP-E 65mm, and use it more than any other lens that I own. Macro is my niche, so I am 100% biased on this.
> 
> What strikes me as odd is that the macro lens designs have been around for quite some time (with the exception of the f/2.8L):
> 
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2017)

There have two new Canon macro lenses recently – the EF-S 35mm Macro and the EF-M 28mm Macro, both with Hybrid IS. Those aren't good enough for you?


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 14, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> There have two new Canon macro lenses recently – the EF-S 35mm Macro and the EF-M 28mm Macro, both with Hybrid IS. Those aren't good enough for you?



So that's five lenses Canon call macro, three of them pretty dedicated macros, that don't count! Hmm......


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > There have two new Canon macro lenses recently – the EF-S 35mm Macro and the EF-M 28mm Macro, both with Hybrid IS. Those aren't good enough for you?
> ...



Six – there's also the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro.


----------



## Drainpipe (Nov 14, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> There have two new Canon macro lenses recently – the EF-S 35mm Macro and the EF-M 28mm Macro, both with Hybrid IS. Those aren't good enough for you?



Ha! Let me modify the flange on my 5DII and I'll get back to you 



chrysoberyl said:


> AF is not a concern to you, is it? If not, why not a third party lens? None of the current offerings appeal to me, but if Sigma came out with a 2X 200mm, I would likely buy it.
> 
> Regarding the MP-E, does it need an update? I am somewhat interested in it, but I see no reviews. What would you have improved?



AF is definitely not a concern. The third party lenses are definite alternatives, but the rendering on skin tones is important for me as a macro photographer ;D

I wholeheartedly agree that if Sigma came out with a 200mm 2x ART I would buy it with a quickness. 

First off, let me make clear that the MP-E is a magnificent lens. Truly amazing, and I love the copy that I have. _However_, one thing I think the MP-E could use is a greater magnification range. Something like .5x-5x. I know I'm probably going to be called a hypocrite concerning my earlier statements about a "true" macro, but sometimes when you have large insects 1x is too tight. .5x would be a great starting point, but not a great ending point if that makes sense. 

Also, I think that it would be amazing of Canon could get the lens a stop or two from f/2.8 to make the viewfinder a little brighter. When you go to 5x it gets pretty dark, even with the lamps on. This is very unlikely as the lens would be even more massive, and it's already pretty stout... metal construction and all.

Canon, if you're listening, *DO NOT* try to make an MP-E replacement with plastic construction. Metal is the ONLY way.



neuroanatomist said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Can I make an amendment? I mean this is sort of a wishlist so I'm excluding anything that can't do at least 1:1 and isn't an EF mount. Is that allowed? ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2017)

Drainpipe said:


> Also, I think that it would be amazing of Canon could get the lens a stop or two from f/2.8 to make the viewfinder a little brighter.



Ignoring the improbability of that happening, it would only help if you replace the stock focusing screen with a high precision-type screen. That's an easy swap on the 5DII, but not so easy on other bodies (like the more recent 5-series bodies). 

Having said that, I typically use Live View with my MP-E 65, and that generally overcomes the light loss at high mag.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 14, 2017)

Drainpipe said:


> Can I make an amendment? I mean this is sort of a wishlist so I'm excluding anything that can't do at least 1:1 and isn't an EF mount. Is that allowed? ;D



No! Once you write it on a forum it is consigned to whatever the rest of the internet make of it 

I understand your hopes, but I expect they are hopeless. I expect Canon believe the TS-E 135 is an interesting enough difference from the aging 180 to consider it covered. The 100 L isn't old. The 50 is the oldest lens ever made and shows no signs of changing, although again the TS-E 50 does the same job better to the same magnification.

Which leaves your favorite, the MP-E65. As you say it has no competition, though there are one or two third party lenses that do similar, so there is no real advantage to making a MkII and as such I don't see one coming out in the near, or far, future.


----------



## tron (Nov 14, 2017)

Drainpipe said:


> I know everyone is very excited about the possibility of the upcoming 50mm, but is there any love for the macros? Canon is unique in that they offer a lens design that literally no other company does in the MP-E 65mm 1x-5x, and the two 100mms and the 180mm are no slouch either. I am a huge proponent of the MP-E 65mm, and use it more than any other lens that I own. Macro is my niche, so I am 100% biased on this.
> 
> What strikes me as odd is that the macro lens designs have been around for quite some time (with the exception of the f/2.8L):
> 
> ...


You forgot to mention the first EF100mm 2.8 Macro (Plain and simple no is no L) a 1990 model. 

http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef289.html


----------



## Drainpipe (Nov 14, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Ignoring the improbability of that happening, it would only help if you replace the stock focusing screen with a high precision-type screen. That's an easy swap on the 5DII, but not so easy on other bodies (like the more recent 5-series bodies).
> 
> Having said that, I typically use Live View with my MP-E 65, and that generally overcomes the light loss at high mag.



Very true, didn't even think of the focusing screen. I'm going to be updating to the 5D IV pretty soon, probably in the next couple months. I'll have to try the live view, can you still use a flash with live view? I think it would work great for tripod work, but not handheld shooting.




privatebydesign said:


> Drainpipe said:
> 
> 
> > Can I make an amendment? I mean this is sort of a wishlist so I'm excluding anything that can't do at least 1:1 and isn't an EF mount. Is that allowed? ;D
> ...



That's it folks, /thread.

Seriously though, I would be disgusted if Canon thought .5x is "good enough". I'm intrigued what third party lenses compare to the MP-E? As far as I knew/know the MP-E is very unique. Once the king, always the king I guess.



tron said:


> You forgot to mention the first EF100mm 2.8 Macro (Plain and simple no is no L) a 1990 model.
> 
> http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef289.html



Right, but that has been replaced by the USM model in 2000: 

http://www.canonrumors.com/buyers-guide/canon-ef-100mm-f2-8l-usm-macro/

Don't add fuel to my fire! Right there it shows a 10 year turnaround! C'MON CANON!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2017)

Drainpipe said:


> I'll have to try the live view, can you still use a flash with live view? I think it would work great for tripod work, but not handheld shooting.



Sure, you can use flash in Live View (although there are some restrictions with silent shooting and 3rd party flashes). I do use Live View for handheld shooting with the MP-E, too...usually when I'm shoving the end of the lens into a bush. One of the huge advantages (besides brightness from gain) is the ability to magnify the image 5x or 10x to achieve critical focus. 




> I'm intrigued what third party lenses compare to the MP-E? As far as I knew/know the MP-E is very unique. Once the king, always the king I guess.



There's the Yasuhara Nanoha Macro Lens 5:1 (but it's only for EF-M, Sony E and m4/3). Has bright, externally-powered LEDs.


----------



## Drainpipe (Nov 14, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sure, you can use flash in Live View (although there are some restrictions with silent shooting and 3rd party flashes). I do use Live View for handheld shooting with the MP-E, too...usually when I'm shoving the end of the lens into a bush. One of the huge advantages (besides brightness from gain) is the ability to magnify the image 5x or 10x to achieve critical focus.


Interesting. I will for sure give this a try.



> There's the Yasuhara Nanoha Macro Lens 5:1 (but it's only for EF-M, Sony E and m4/3). Has bright, externally-powered LEDs.



That's very interesting. Mirrorless has always piqued my interest for macro. Dustin Rhoades, Paul the Explorer and a few others use mirrorless with great effect.


----------



## Zeidora (Nov 14, 2017)

Re replacing focusing screen, it is not that difficult on post mk2 5-series bodies. Did it on my 5DsR without any problems. 
Re live view and flash, the only issue is the rather long shutter lag compared to VF shooting. If you do stacking, then you have to take the shutter lag into consideration when programming the firing pulses on the Cogynsis StackShot.
Agreed on true macro starting at 1:1, also agreed that 1:2 can be useful for some subject matter. One lens for everything is unrealistic.


----------



## Drainpipe (Nov 14, 2017)

Zeidora said:


> One lens for everything is unrealistic.



Very true. I'm not asking for infinity focus, just .5x 

Guess I'll have to start carting around my 100mm with the MP-E for the big ones. I'll have to devise a new flash and diffusion system as well


----------



## NancyP (Nov 14, 2017)

There is NO OTHER field-usable >1X macro lens out there to compare with the MP-E. Laowa has made an infinity to 2x manual lens, I don't know how good it is. For studio work there are plenty of options using bellows and (purpose-made bellows lens, reversed high end enlarger lens, etc). But every insect photographer I know that works in the field, uses the MP-E and some flash apparatus with home-made diffuser. Bellows are too fragile for the field. Diffuser apparatus breaks? Just build another one for $2.00 worth of raw materials.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2017)

NancyP said:


> There is NO OTHER field-usable >1X macro lens out there to compare with the MP-E.



Just to be pedantic, I've been quite able to use my EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS lens in the field, and it goes to 1*.2*x.


----------



## SkynetTX (Nov 14, 2017)

An EF-S 60mm f/2.8 *IS* USM would be a great update for handheld shooting. And we need an EF(-S) 250mm f/5.6 IS USM with a minimum focusing distance about *0.75* meters in case we physically can't get closer to the subject.


----------



## Drainpipe (Nov 16, 2017)

NancyP said:


> There is NO OTHER field-usable >1X macro lens out there to compare with the MP-E. Laowa has made an infinity to 2x manual lens, I don't know how good it is. For studio work there are plenty of options using bellows and (purpose-made bellows lens, reversed high end enlarger lens, etc). But every insect photographer I know that works in the field, uses the MP-E and some flash apparatus with home-made diffuser. Bellows are too fragile for the field. Diffuser apparatus breaks? Just build another one for $2.00 worth of raw materials.



I tend to agree with this.

While I’m not discounting the EF-S line, to my knowledge there is no such thing as an EF-S L, or MP-E equivalent.


----------

