Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Macro lens

  • 27-07-2010 12:14am
    #1
    Nozebleed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,727 ✭✭✭


    Hi. just wondering if its necessary to buy a macro flash when purchasing a macro lens? im considering buying the Canon 50mm which is priced around 330. should i buy a flash too? what do you guys recommend i do? its on going to be used for mucking about! nothing serious.


Comments

  • #2
    hbr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 760 ✭✭✭hbr


    Nozebleed wrote: »
    Hi. just wondering if its necessary to buy a macro flash when purchasing a macro lens? im considering buying the Canon 50mm which is priced around 330. should i buy a flash too? what do you guys recommend i do? its on going to be used for mucking about! nothing serious.

    A ring flash would be nice to have, but not absolutely necessary.
    Which Canon 50mm were you looking at? €330 would be a lot to
    pay for the 50mm f/2.5.


  • #3
    PCPhoto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    for around that much you can pick up a secondhand 100mm macro .... which is much better.

    As regards using dedicated flash .... it gives a better effect when in places when traditional flash cant cover, worth the investment in my opinion - but then again I'm a camera gear junkie.

    I had the MR-14 and MT-24 and ML-3 .... havent really gotten any use out of any of them - I dont do macro work - dont have the time, sold the MT-24 on Adverts still have the other 2 flashes, currently have 180mm macro, 2xCanon 50mm macro and 1xSigma 50mm macro and MP-E65 , sold 100mm macro around the same time as I sold the flash (MT-24)


  • #4
    Thecageyone
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,756 ✭✭✭Thecageyone


    50mm macro means having to get in really, really close on your subject. The flash might just give it a heart attack [if it's a wee bug] :D

    I imagine for close in macro you are better off with a 90mm/100mm+ to give you a little distance, much better for bugs at least. Flowers don't mind you getting close.

    I'd love a 105mm f/2.8 myself, pricey things these macro specific lenses though;


  • #5
    oshead
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,131 ✭✭✭oshead


    It depends really on weather you want to do still life or more animated stuff. Plus, will you be working @ 1.5 or just doing a bunch of closeups. These things make a real difference with a macro lens. I'd say go for the flash. Most of the time you're shot requires a very narrow aperture say f8 - f11 so it's nice to be able to pop a bit of light at the subject.

    I've just upgraded to a full frame camera, the 5D MkII so I have a Canon EF-S 60mm macro and a Canon MR-14EX ringlite flash that i'd consider selling if we could agree a price. PM me if you want more details.

    Here's an image I took using that combo, tripod mounted. You couldn't have got this shot without using a flash.

    7DCA022A2F314E128EBE5568A3EEA04D-800.jpg


Advertisement