EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM as macro lens

[MiloP]

I would like to have some opinions from anyone who is interested to share his/her take on this....

- Its a v good lens (most reviews says so)
- Its can't take close up pictures as one would like it to be (magnification.... not ace)
- DPreview quote:
"Magnification with Extension Tube EF12 II 0.45-0.231
Magnification with Extension Tube EF25 II 1.71-0.51 "
- I'm cheapo, so will try to save on macro lens, by using Extension tube.

Questions...
1. Will i get 'near as good picture qualities' as what the lens itself can give? (Of course not comparing to dedicated macro lens)
2. How much is the canon EF25?
3. Will the lens work well with third party extension tube?
4. Last but not least.... do you think its a good alternative?

[megaweb]

Quote: 1. Will i get 'near as good picture qualities' as what the lens itself can give? (Of course not comparing to dedicated macro lens)

You cannot achieve macro magnification like 1:1. Which link did you get the below info ?
"Magnification with Extension Tube EF12 II 0.45-0.231
Magnification with Extension Tube EF25 II 1.71-0.51 "
I dun believe 17-55mm + 25mm ext. tube will give > 1:1 magnification. The info should be a mistake.

Quote: 2. How much is the canon EF25?

Expensive hollow tube. Cost $200++

Quote: 3. Will the lens work well with third party extension tube?

Unsure 3rd party ext. tube will work with E-FS lens

Quote: 4. Last but not least.... do you think its a good alternative?

Answer for me is NO. Ext tube works well with longer focal length like 70-200mm or longer.

[MiloP]

Got the info from Dpreview http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06...f28g.asp#press under the lens specification.

Thx for the prompt reply

[StrifeYun]

i thought of this once ,hmmm
ext. tube $$$$ only canon ext tube version II can use with efs lens. not sure about 3rd party ones.

i tried the 17-55 with a reynox msn 202 macro lens attachment link below hope this helps

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=295638

cheers !

[zj2000]

Originally Posted by megaweb You cannot achieve macro magnification like 1:1. Which link did you get the below info ? "Magnification with Extension Tube EF12 II 0.45-0.231 Magnification with Extension Tube EF25 II 1.71-0.51 " I dun believe 17-55mm + 25mm ext. tube will give > 1:1 magnification. The info should be a mistake.

Actually, amount of magnification you'll get is = focal length / extension.. So a 50mm lens used with 50mm of extension tubes will give you 1:1 magnification. When using the 17-55 with EF 25II, you can get greater than 1:1 when you zoom out to anything less that 25mm... at least in theory.... normally you will get vignetting for 30+mm and below so generally it is not recommended that you use too short a focal length....

Originally Posted by megaweb Expensive hollow tube. Cost $200++ Unsure 3rd party ext. tube will work with E-FS lens

This is correct, I was out looking for 3rd party tubes to use with my kit lens but couldn't find any that can take ef-s... end up buying the 50mm 1.8 to use with my tubes

Originally Posted by megaweb Answer for me is NO. Ext tube works well with longer focal length like 70-200mm or longer.

I beg to differ, ext tubes can be used with long telephotos or short prime lenses to achieve different purposes.... in the case of my 50mm1.8 I got myself a v cheap macro setup that can go beyond 1:1 when used with my triplus extension tubes.... The tubes allows me to retain the sharpness of the 50mm although I have to dial in +1 / +2 ev due to the light falloff...

[MiloP]

Originally Posted by StrifeYun i thought of this once ,hmmm ext. tube $$$$ only canon ext tube version II can use with efs lens. not sure about 3rd party ones. i tried the 17-55 with a reynox msn 202 macro lens attachment link below hope this helps http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=295638 cheers !

Thx, are you saying the reynox attaches to the front end of the lens?

[megaweb]

Originally Posted by zj2000 Actually, amount of magnification you'll get is = focal length / extension.. So a 50mm lens used with 50mm of extension tubes will give you 1:1 magnification. When using the 17-55 with EF 25II, you can get greater than 1:1 when you zoom out to anything less that 25mm... at least in theory.... normally you will get vignetting for 30+mm and below so generally it is not recommended that you use too short a focal length....

In theory, yes you are right. But not sure you can focus with ext. tube at widest. Maybe ask those who own the 17-55mm lens tested with EF25mm.

Quote: I beg to differ, ext tubes can be used with long telephotos or short prime lenses to achieve different purposes.... in the case of my 50mm1.8 I got myself a v cheap macro setup that can go beyond 1:1 when used with my triplus extension tubes.... The tubes allows me to retain the sharpness of the 50mm although I have to dial in +1 / +2 ev due to the light falloff...

50mm + 2x 25mm ext. tube is also not cheap. The setup is rather bulky and DOF is very shallow. Anyway is like what you say, depend on purposes.

[megaweb]

Originally Posted by MiloP Thx, are you saying the reynox attaches to the front end of the lens?

Maybe you should let us know what kind of macro photography are you into ?

[Denosha]

I don't think the 17-55 is a good lens to begin with since it's magnification is rather low. Anyway, I suspect a reversed 50mm 1.8 might actually be cheaper and produce better quality (although I'm not sure what kinda magnification you'll get). I don't think any 3rd party extension tubes support the EF-S mount so you'll need to get the canon ones which are very expensive i think.

[MiloP]

Originally Posted by megaweb Maybe you should let us know what kind of macro photography are you into ?

I'm using the lens as a walkaround lens and so the type of macros ....
- walking in a park, saw a bug, converting the lens, take some bugs at close up
- idling at home, nothing to do, itchy hand, convertine the lens, take anything that is of interest.

New to this hobby, so not a big timer. but cheapo, trying to maximise what i'm gonna have.

[MiloP]

Originally Posted by zj2000 Actually, amount of magnification you'll get is = focal length / extension.. So a 50mm lens used with 50mm of extension tubes will give you 1:1 magnification. When using the 17-55 with EF 25II, you can get greater than 1:1 when you zoom out to anything less that 25mm... at least in theory.... normally you will get vignetting for 30+mm and below so generally it is not recommended that you use too short a focal length.....

Does that mean magnification = 27.2 (set 17mm x1.6 due crop ratio) / 25mm (ef25 tube) means greater that 1:1 already?

Is this how we calculate?

[StrifeYun]

Originally Posted by MiloP Thx, are you saying the reynox attaches to the front end of the lens?

yup, its attached infront, but the max filter size is 67mm i think. i used a step down filter to attached the reynox lens.

[zj2000]

Originally Posted by MiloP I'm using the lens as a walkaround lens and so the type of macros .... - walking in a park, saw a bug, converting the lens, take some bugs at close up - idling at home, nothing to do, itchy hand, convertine the lens, take anything that is of interest. New to this hobby, so not a big timer. but cheapo, trying to maximise what i'm gonna have.

In that case, just get 1 of those cheap 3rd party 70-300 with 1:2 magnification at 300mm.... extension tubes, close up lenses, reverse macro all need you to get really close to the subject, doubt you can take any shots of insects that way....

[zj2000]

Originally Posted by MiloP Does that mean magnification = 27.2 (set 17mm x1.6 due crop ratio) / 25mm (ef25 tube) means greater that 1:1 already? Is this how we calculate?

No, the focal length in this case is 17mm... a rough gauge will be 17mm focal length / 17mm extension = 1:1 17mm focal length / 34mm extension = 2:1... actual amount might differ since all lenses will have some amount of extension already built in....

[StrifeYun]

hmmm .... 2cents ...

0 times zoom ~ a 50mm lens view.
on whatever crop factor, the view size of an image u see on a 50mm is the same, just that the "1.0" crop has a bigger sensor view(thur a wider view) than a "1.6"(times smaller crop factor)

Image below illustrates, RED rectangle is for full frame 1.0 crop camera, BLUE is for "1.6" crop size sensor.



a 1:1 magnification is how an image can fit onto the sensor (not too sure how to explain this part hee)

extention tubes allow u to go closer to the subject to get a better "zoom-in"

[zj2000]

Originally Posted by StrifeYun hmmm .... 2cents ... 0 times zoom ~ a 50mm lens view. on whatever crop factor, the view size of an image u see on a 50mm is the same, just that the "1.0" crop has a bigger sensor view(thur a wider view) than a "1.6"(times smaller crop factor) Image below illustrates, RED rectangle is for full frame 1.0 crop camera, BLUE is for "1.6" crop size sensor. a 1:1 magnification is how an image can fit onto the sensor (not too sure how to explain this part hee) extention tubes allow u to go closer to the subject to get a better "zoom-in"

actually 1:1 means a 1cm object in real life will project a 1cm image on the focal plane... so regardless of whether your body is a 1.6 / 1.3 / FF, a 1:1 lens will project the same sized image on the focal plane.... but because the size of the sensor in the 3 bodies are different, the object will fill the frame to different extents

[MiloP]

Originally Posted by zj2000 In that case, just get 1 of those cheap 3rd party 70-300 with 1:2 magnification at 300mm.... extension tubes, close up lenses, reverse macro all need you to get really close to the subject, doubt you can take any shots of insects that way....

If extension tube can solve the macro issue, then spending approx $200 on the tube may be a OK solution, ... to me.
Why i raise this issue is since i'm going to get the so call canon EF-S walkaround ultimate lens, with its good optics + tube = good macro.... good alternative isn't it

Unless theres a good 'near $200 macro lens' out there....

[zj2000]

Originally Posted by MiloP If extension tube can solve the macro issue, then spending approx $200 on the tube may be a OK solution, ... to me. Why i raise this issue is since i'm going to get the so call canon EF-S walkaround ultimate lens, with its good optics + tube = good macro.... good alternative isn't it Unless theres a good 'near $200 macro lens' out there....

uhhh... not the simple, how to put it.... ext tubes are not for ppl looking for instant gratification, you need patience + training and sometimes tripod to be able to realise it's potential... though with a zoom lens it is easier to use....

problem is the range you can focus becomes restricted... eg. when i attach 67mm of extension to my 50mm, i can only focus on things that are 10cm away, if the insect is 11cm away I can't focus on it anymore.... the distance that you can focus depends on your lens' focal length and the amount of extension you attach, with a zoom lens you can use the zoom to focus since by zooming in and out you are changing your lens' focal length and the area that you can focus on changes as well...

[MiloP]

Trying to digest the infos you'd given me...pls help me further with reference to figures from 17-55 instead.

- closest focusing distance - 0.35m (with EF25, will min focus dist reduced?)
- max magnification - 0.17 @ 55mm
- Magnification with Extension Tube EF25 II - 1.71-0.51

On your eg, based on fixed 50mm, focusing distance is limited. Then what about dedicated macro lens? isn't it the same?(fixed focusing distance)

from http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx
"With a relatively-long-for-its-focal-length-range closest focusing distance of 1.15' (0.35m), the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens yields a meager maximum magnification of 0.17x (at 55mm). As usual, extension tubes can increase the magnification ability significantly. With the Canon EF 12mm Extension Tube II, magnification is 0.45x-0.231x. With the Canon EF 25mm Extension Tube II, magnification is 1.71x-0.51x. As this is an EF-S lens, version II of Canon's Extension Tubes are required."

It seems since its a zoom lens, therefore i will have more focusing range. (not out of focus easily) - True?

[zj2000]

With tubes, your min focusing distance will be reduced and that's the reason why you can get higher magnification. However, the new mfd with tubes attached is no longer constant and varies, at 55mm your mfd might be 10cm from the lens, at 30mm it might be 1cm from the lens, at 17cm your lens might actually be blocking and you can no longer get the subject in focus.... I say "might" since I don't have a 17-55 to try it out on....

if the 1.71x magnification is indeed achievable, it will be when the lens is at 17mm... I'm sure you can see a pattern here, as focal becomes shorter, your mfd decreases as well.... Now assume the bug is 5cm away, you want to get as big an image as possible so you zoom out to 17mm, but the bug is not in focus, so you zoom to 30mm... you keep zooming in and out until you find the shortest focal length where the bug is in focus..

macro lenses do not have these limitations and can focus to infinity since they are just like any other prime lens except that their mfd is significantly shorter