Canon 1Ds Mklll. Best copy lens for repro work?

[Dinarius]

I've been using Canon's 50mm f2.5 Macro for copy/repro work.

I'm just wondering if I can do better?

If someone has other recommendations, I would be very grateful for links to lens tests - preferably, comparative lens tests.

Many thanks.

D.

[Geoff Wittig]

I've been using Canon's 50mm f2.5 Macro for copy/repro work.

I'm just wondering if I can do better?

If someone has other recommendations, I would be very grateful for links to lens tests - preferably, comparative lens tests.

Many thanks.

D.

What's the size of your subject?
I'd presume that Canon's 100 mm f:2.8 macro lens would be easier to use for copy/repro because the greater working distance makes it easier to light the subject evenly. It's also by reputation an extremely sharp lens, though I'm not interested enough to track down comparative test results for you.  
I've actually used Canon's 180 f:3.5 macro for copying book pages, mostly because it's the macro lens I own. Keeping the subject flat enough to get it all within a reasonable depth of field was always more of a problem than any limitations in lens quality.

[Luis Argerich]

Define "better" please.
Do you need something sharper? Wider? Longer?

Impossible to guess but options are:
- 60mm 2.8 macro
- 100mm 2.8 macro
- 90mm TS 2.8
- 180mm macro

Who knows?

[MichaelAlanBielat]

I would probably have to second that macro purchase for reproduction work. Make sure it is a prime lens as well.

I know others have had much success with Canon but I cannot say the same. All zoom lenses I owned were soft and just "ehh" The 70-200mm was a good lens that I used a lot. I seemed to have come to the conclusion that their zooms are great for crop cameras and their primes for their full frame ones. Plus with the primes you can fix their front/back focusing with the micro adjustment feature in the user menu.

Have you taken a look at the Hasselblad Multi-Shot stuff? I own the H3DII-31 but had a multi-shot demo-ed to me as well and OH MAN! If you want resolution and the utmost image quality then that is where you need to look. If you are wondering how you can "do better" then look no further. I don't do anything that deals with reproduction work like you but I would definitely give it a look if you haven't done so already.

http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/997168/...atasheet_v2.pdf

Just my two cents.

[Thomas Krüger]

You can check the MTF charts of Apo Rodagon enlarger lenses: http://www.butzi.net/rodenstock/rodenstock.htm

[wesley]

I've been using Canon's 50mm f2.5 Macro for copy/repro work.

I'm just wondering if I can do better?

If someone has other recommendations, I would be very grateful for links to lens tests - preferably, comparative lens tests.

Many thanks.

D.

Hello, I have been using the Leica 60mm Macro for a long time. Color gradation, sharpness is top notch. I have compared the results to Canon lenses. The lens is unbeatable, even at wide open corners are sharp and distortion free.

Wes

[Craig Lamson]

Hello, I have been using the Leica 60mm Macro for a long time. Color gradation, sharpness is top notch. I have compared the results to Canon lenses. The lens is unbeatable, even at wide open corners are sharp and distortion free.

Wes

I use an old 55mm micro Nikkor on a 1DsmkIII , a really fine lens and very cost effective considering I've owned it for years

[stever]

i think the 100 is a better design and the working distance worthwhile, but the Zeiss 100 macro is probably the best around today

[DaveCurtis]

i think the 100 is a better design and the working distance worthwhile, but the Zeiss 100 macro is probably the best around today

I would agree with Steve's comments.

I would add that the Zeiss 50mm f2 Makro-Planar macro is another option. ZF version only currently but the ZE version is due at some stage. The ZF lens gets very good reviews. From memory it's not true macro but 1:2.

[Dinarius]

Cheers guys! Many thanks for taking the time to reply.

I should have made it clearer in the original post that sharpness is all I'm concerned about, and whether or not I can do better on that score. The Canon is extremely good though.

I do also have the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro, but it's too long for most situations.

Michael Alan, yes I also own a Hasselblad 39MP multi-shot and, yes, it is astonishing. But, it has to be shot tethered and I am frequently in situations where this is not possible and/or the Canon file size is more than enough - hence my question.

Am I right in thinking that the Zeiss options would be usable with manual focus only? Do they need an adaptor to attach to the Canon?

Thanks again.

D.

[DaveCurtis]

Cheers guys! Many thanks for taking the time to reply.

Am I right in thinking that the Zeiss options would be usable with manual focus only? Do they need an adaptor to attach to the Canon?

Thanks again.

D.

Yep, manual focus only + adapter for the 50mm and 100mm Zeiss macros.

[Dinarius]

Two things........

B&H only seem to have these lenses Zeiss Makro lenses for Pentax and Nikon. I presume then that a Canon adapter has to be bought separately?

Also, what's the difference between ZE, ZK and ZF?

Just had a live chat session with B&H. They say that Zeiss Makros are not available for Canons. Only the 50mm and 85mm non-macro. As per here>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...p;x=67&y=13

D.

[DaveCurtis]

Two things........

B&H only seem to have these lenses Zeiss Makro lenses for Pentax and Nikon. I presume then that a Canon adapter has to be bought separately?

Also, what's the difference between ZE, ZK and ZF?

Just had a live chat session with B&H. They say that Zeiss Makros are not available for Canons. Only the 50mm and 85mm non-macro. As per here>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...p;x=67&y=13

D.

ZE = Canon mount ZF = Nikon mount.

There are only two lenses out in the Canon ZE mout at present. 50mm f1.4 and the 85mm. More are expected later on in the year.

Yes, to use the ZF lenses on Canon you must use an adapter.

If you really want the best info on these lenses you need to subscribe (paid) to Diglloyd, Lloyd Chambers.

[Dinarius]

Dave,

If I understand you correctly then it is possible to use the Zeiss/Nikon Makro 50mm on a Canon camera.

Odd then that B&H didn't know about it and don't appear to sell it.

So who does?

Thanks.

D.

[DaveCurtis]

Dave,

If I understand you correctly then it is possible to use the Zeiss/Nikon Makro 50mm on a Canon camera.

Odd then that B&H didn't know about it and don't appear to sell it.

So who does?

Thanks.

D.

The lens is listed on their site:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4725..._ZF_Manual.html


In regard the adapters. Novoflex and cameraquest seems to be the best. Keep away from the cheap adapters.

As I said before, Lloyd Chambers has the best info on these lenses.

[Herkko]

But, it has to be shot tethered and I am frequently in situations where this is not possible and/or the Canon file size is more than enough - hence my question.

I find that sentence contradicting to what you said earlier. In my opinion Canon EF 50/2.5 is outresolving 5DMKII (supposedly about same iq than with 1DsMKIII) at normal repro apertures. I have been finding much more impact on light arrangements, focusing with tethered computer etc. than with anything concerning 50/2.5 Macro lens performance at similar tasks.

[Peterretep]

I've been using Canon's 50mm f2.5 Macro for copy/repro work.

I'm just wondering if I can do better?

If someone has other recommendations, I would be very grateful for links to lens tests - preferably, comparative lens tests.

Many thanks.

D.

I use the Canon 180 macro. It is very sharp with a good working distance to subject. A few years ago in a forum Chuck Westfall from Canon wrote the 180 was their sharpest lens in their lineup.

Peter

Architectural Photography by Peter Montanti, www.mountainphotographics.com

[Anthony R]

The Olympus OM90/2 is superb, up to you if you think it's too long or if you want to spend that much money ($900-1100)

[Dinarius]

I find that sentence contradicting to what you said earlier. In my opinion Canon EF 50/2.5 is outresolving 5DMKII (supposedly about same iq than with 1DsMKIII) at normal repro apertures. I have been finding much more impact on light arrangements, focusing with tethered computer etc. than with anything concerning 50/2.5 Macro lens performance at similar tasks.

Herrko,

I have no idea what you mean by this. I never wrote which Canon camera I use (the 1Ds Mklll, as it happens) and no one is talking about the 5DMkll. However, I stand by my point that the Hasselblad in multi-shot mode is of a different order entirely to the Canon but, as I wrote above, I sometimes don't need the file size.

Yes, the Canon 50mm macro is an excellent lens. I'm just wondering if there's better, that's all.

Dave,

Thanks for that. Yes, I had seen both lenses on the B&H site, but I haven't seen adapters anywhere.

Do you have any links to vendors' sites?

Thanks.

D.

[jjlphoto]

Yes, the Canon 50mm macro is an excellent lens. I'm just wondering if there's better, that's all.

I have it, it is a good lens. In that focal length however, the Leica 60/2.8 Macro Elmarit-R is better. The Leica has no visible distortion (I've noticed some in the Canon), and the Leica resolves fine detail better. For longer, the Leica APO Macro 100/2.8-R is highly rated.