I am in need of a macro lens for my xlh1/xl2:

I am aware of the 100 f 2.8 canon and the sigma 150/f2.8 both fine lenses.


I was thinking the 65mm MP-E (1to 5x) might be majical. can this lens work just like any other standard EF lens?

thanks,


dale guthormsen

Hi Dale.

Provided you have the Canon EF to XL adaptor, you should be able to use it.

Don't forget though, the magnification will be really extreme because of the difference in format size.
Instead of 1:1 to 1:5, it will be more like 1:7 to 1:35.
Of course, no infinity focus either.

I hope that helps

Hi Dale,

Will you be using a bench set-up or will you be working “in the field” with live subjects?

I have an EX3 for which I made an adapter for Nikon lenses including the G models. Even using a 60 mm lens on the ½” chips of the EX3 it can be very hard to locate the subject quickly. It would be much harder with a longer lens and smaller chips.

It is easy enough to make some sort of a sighting device if you are working at long distances but for macro work it is a problem particularly if it is a visually complicated location– at one stage I was recording the activities of beetle larvae in leaf litter and it was extremely difficult to find the desired point.

I also use the EX3 supplied zoom lens with a “Canon 77mm Close-up lens 500D”. This is a high quality 2 diopter lens that seems to be well corrected and I am very pleased with the results. Because I can still use the zoom finding the subject is much easier. A limitation of close-up lenses is that you have a limited range of working distances that gets less as the diopters increase, in my case the subject can be no more than 50 or no less than 32 cm from the close up lens. Another limitation of course is that close-up lenses are not as macro.

I don't see any sense buying a seperate SLR/DSLR 35mm format Macro lens for closeups in the field. Even with the superb Sigma DG 24mm f/1.8 Macro it would be too long when matched to the XL2 or XL-H1. I prefer 180mm or 200mm true Macro lenses, but they are far too long for most macro subjects when matched to the Canon XL camcorders.

The Canon XL 16X Manual lens is quite good in Macro mode, and even the Canon XL 6X HD lens is good for close subjects in Macro mode.

i use with some success tele lens to do macro work with the xlh1. I use Canon 100-400 zoom. Is not always easy to find and focus, but more of insects, invertebrates, flowers and so on are low movement subjects and is possible to have good images. I don't think it could be a first macro choice for everybody, but if you use to shoot also big animals as me and you need for sure a tele lens, could be a good idea to use it also for macro

[QUOTE=Mike Tapa;1485687]Hi Dale.

Provided you have the Canon EF to XL adaptor, you should be able to use it.

Don't forget though, the magnification will be really extreme because of the difference in format size.
Instead of 1:1 to 1:5, it will be more like 1:7 to 1:35.
Of course, no infinity focus either.

I am puzzled as to why the magnification should change. I thought that 1:1 meant that the object size equals the image size and 1:5 meant that the object was 5 times the size of the image. I would have thought that 1:7 and 1:35 would indicate less magnification.

SLR/DSLR lenses are made for 35mm cameras and so when a tiny sensor - like on the XL camcorders - is used it will of course greatly magnify the image.

Regarding infinity, you will have full manual focus from macro to infinity if you use Nikon Nikkor lenses on the XL camcorders, plus the added positive aspect that no extra glass is used in the Canon XL-Nikon adapter and in my view it produces slightly sharper video footage than when the EF adapter is used with Canon lenses.

I am in need of a macro lens for my xlh1/xl2:
I am aware of the 100 f 2.8 canon and the sigma 150/f2.8 both fine lenses.

Hello Dale,
I have the XL-H1 and the Canon 100mm macro f2,8 with the EF/XL adapter. Results are really good with this lens. It becomes a 700mm macro! You can shoot insects, for instance from 30cm (1 feet) and not scare them.

I am puzzled as to why the magnification should change. I thought that 1:1 meant that the object size equals the image size and 1:5 meant that the object was 5 times the size of the image. I would have thought that 1:7 and 1:35 would indicate less magnification.

You are right, Alastair, should have been 0.138:1 to 0.694:1
Still Super cropped macro.

I have used my Tamaron 90/2,8 on my XL2 in some productions. I think it's super that you can get that close and it works in the field too...

Yes, the Tamron 90mm Macro is a superb and sharp lens; although would be more thought of as a close-focussing extreme 650mm telephoto lens when matched to the XL2.