Much anticipation leads to a failed product.
My primary interest in the Sigma DP1 was as a street shooter – meaning minimal shutter lag.
Well, I’m afraid they blew it, as the always objective DP Review reports.
Looks like I will be sticking with the Panasonic LX-1 for now.
What a disappointment.
Still, it never hurts to be curious:
No half measures here!
My preliminary ramblings about the Canon 100mm macro focused largely on ergonomics with a quick peek at image quality.
One of the advantages of the 100mm focal length is the doubled – compared with a 50mm – subject to camera distance, making lighting issues easier. But I decided I wasn’t about to do things half way, so I checked into ring light flashes for the 5D. Well, Canon wants over $400 for theirs to which all I could politely say was “No thank you”.
So a quick visit to that repository of thieves, cutthroats and crooks known as ePrey was called for and, lo and behold, simply dozens of ring flashes were on sale. After weeding through the offerings I finally found one which used a real flash tube (rather than poncy, underpowered, LEDs) and, best of all, mated with the ETTL circuitry in the 5D to make just about everything automatic.
$120 and a few days later UPS dropped it off. It comes with three adapter rings, the 58mm one of which fits the 100mm Macro. Look closely and you can see there’s a real flash tube in there:
The body takes four AA cells and looks suspiciously like the body of a Vivitar 283 flash gun. Recycling time is 3 seconds with fresh alkaline batteries. The foot has a nice screw retainer and you can see the contacts for ETTL in the base:
Here’s how the whole thing looks on the 5D – the power supply and tube are incredibly light, weighing less than the lens itself.
Once the base ring, which rotates freely on the flash tube body, is threaded onto the lens, the tube assembly is free to rotate and, if you think about it, that’s no problem. The base ring has nice, coarse serrations for a proper grip and protrudes just above the body of the flash tube – nice.
Use is simplicity itself. ETTL balances exposure between flash and camera automatically, the lighting is shadowless, and all you have to do is frame and press the button. If the flash is in range the green LED on the rear illuminates after the picture is taken to show all is well. It would have been nice if it did this with the first pressure on the shutter release, but, heck, ‘film’ is cheap in the digital age, no?
Suffice it to say that the whole thing works perfectly out of the box, at one quarter of the price of the Canon branded device. OK, so the finish is more GM than Toyota, but at that price, who cares?
And because even our six year old could take sharp snaps with this little combo, here’s one which mixes sharp and blurred, courtesy of ETTL, which has mixed flash and regular light by using a slow shutter speed, adding blur to a subject swaying in the wind. Choice of a low ISO setting compounds the blur.
More later.
Not your father’s macro lens.
For a preamble on macro lenses, please click here.
Over the past five years anytime I wanted to get really close to something meant using my Olympus C5050Z five megapixel digital. Quality is decent, it focuses postage stamp close and framing using the built-in LCD screen is dead accurate. Rack the lens out to maximum zoom and you also get reasonable subject-to-lens clearance for illumination purposes.
If nothing else, it has been used to list any number of film cameras and lenses on various auction sites, so it has paid for itself many times. Most digital cameras, especially the point-and-shoots, focus easily into what we think of as the macro range, so the Olympus is nothing special in this regard. Handy, though, and easy to use, with auto everything – focus, flash, exposure.
By contrast, here’s my latest Canon lens addition – macro with a vengeance.
With modern multi-coated glasses, charging extra for a lens hood must be as big a scam as ethanol, and I never use one on any of my Canon lenses except on the fish-eye and the 400mm, where they are non-removable. Why? Because they add bulk and make no earthly difference to the picture. And if you have seen the hood for this Canon, you will not want to buy it either. But I do use an UV filter on everything and have recently convinced myself that the German B+W ones are better made than their Japanese counterparts, so I paid up a few dollars more for the real thing. Seems I’m still a sucker for that ‘Made in Germany’ thing. The main reason I use a filter is that I think any decent photographer should throw out all his lens caps.
Now no one could accuse the Canon Macro of being pretty to look at – not like in Leica Summicron or Contarex Planar pretty – but its inverted cone design speaks of the Bauhaus, function and funky form. Construction is typical Canon prime – meaning good if not ‘L’ quality and a whole lot better than their crappy kit zooms. Best of all, at under $500, if you drop it you are upset but not destroyed. Try saying that about your Leica lenses….
Everything about the ergonomics of this lens is right. The 100mm focal length means you get a nice long subject distance to simplify lighting. You are twice as far away as with a 50mm macro, at the cost of depth of field. The short (about 135 degree) focus throw from infinity to 1:1 (the lens goes down to life size on a full frame camera) is very smooth and full time manual focusing is included if you use autofocus – very handy for a macro lens where small focus adjustments are the order of the day. The bulk and weight of the lens make for perfect balance on the 5D, meaning hand holding is easy.
Best of all, unlike all those macro lenses I illustrated yesterday, the length of this one does not change as it is racked out – meaning that no new obstacle to proper lighting presents itself. And auto exposure means no more figuring of light loss as 1:1 reproduction is approached – a loss of two stops in brightness owing to the extension of the lens from the sensor. That holds whether the lens is made by Canon or Ballspond Roadski optics.
How accurately does the lens focus on the 5D? I am using the center rectangle here which is the most sensitive focus point in the camera’s design. Placing the camera and lens on a tripod on the high tech Pindelski test bench with the camera at 45 degrees to the tape measure, here is the result with the lens autofocused on the line just above the numeral 3 with the lens at full aperture of f/2.8, set at its closest focus distance:
That looks pretty spot on to me.
Not convinced? Here it is much larger:
Far better than I could do with manual focus.
Now I am an empiricist by nature, not a test bench nerd, but with a lens whose primary use is for the very close-up subject, a few seconds doing this determines whether the lens is a keeper or not. Clearly, this one is a keeper. Thank you, B&H and thank you, Canon!
The Dr. Pindelski optical test bench? High tech at its best:
Because of the internal space needed to allow those elements to be racked out when focusing close, the 100mm Macro is necessarily quite a bit longer than that greatest portrait lens I have ever used, the 85mm:
So ergonomics, autofocus accuracy and sharpness are not going to be an issue with the Canon 100mm USM Macro lens.
Focus speed? Simply startling, with little noise. The only time I could trip it up is by focusing at the closest distance then recomposing on a subject at infinity with poorly defined details. The lens would hunt back and forth before locking in. For non-macro use Canon thoughtfully provides a focus limiter switch to prevent this kind of silliness. In practice, I have found that setting the 5D to servo-focus is ideal when this lens is used in the close-up range. This setting makes the lens focus continuously even after the first pressure is taken up on the shutter release button and you can hear the stepper motor working away to maintain the subject in focus. As I said at the beginning of this article, this is not your father’s macro lens.
As I already own the fast 85mm non-macro, I have little interest in using the 100mm Macro lens for any but macro subjects. To do otherwise would be like using an f/1 lens at f/4 – a waste of money. If, on the other hand, this is your only portrait-length lens, then use in the studio should be just fine.
The challenge now is to see whether I can take any snaps remotely up to the technical standards of this optic. Subsequent articles will determine that.
Click here for Part II.
Time to update.
Canon has released firmware 1.1.1 for the 5D.
Download is free and installation instructions are included.
Here are the changes:
Here’s the installation in progress:
For me the significant feature is that high capacity 8gB and 16gB cards are now supported. I’m not rushing out to buy these but it’s nice to know I can use them when Vogue calls for that special photo session with Elle McPherson.
The ‘new lenses’ referred to are these:
I somehow doubt any of these exotics will be darkening my gadget bag any time soon. And at the wide end, the Canon Fish-eye beats the pants off their 14mm ‘L’ lens at a fraction of the price and bulk – all you need is ImageAlign and Photoshop.
As for enhanced compatibility with DPP, I don’t use that so it adds no value in my case.
By the way, if you are contemplating purchase of a new camera, most manufacturers now make instruction manuals available on line and it is a good way of learning about features and limitations.
Some neat editing.
Snapped in San Francisco’s Chinatown. The editor of this little comedy had even gone to the trouble of trying to match the paint color, and while I may not agree with the result, it is every bit as tedious to be constantly reminded of the purported existence of a supreme being (it’s even on the currency, for heaven’s sake!) in what is averred to be a secular society. In America, it seems, there’s more religion involved in running for elected office than even the next Pope has to contend with. Bizarre.
Technical note: The widescreen format of the Panasonic LX-1 is a welcome feature here. The small sensor and stretched lens design needs quite a bit of sharpening and chromatic aberration correction – here are my default import setting in Lightroom – bear in mind that I use the camera at its widest lens setting almost all the time. That means 6.3mm, equivalent to 28mm on a full frame. Chromatic aberration falls as the lens is zoomed.
While the LX-1 has been obsoleted by the current LX-2, I would guess things did not change in this regard as the lens on the LX-2 is the same. You can read about automatically applying these corrections in Lightroom here. If anything, I would guess that more sharpening is called for with the LX-2, owing to the overcrowding caused by all those extra pixels on a miniscule sensor, each competing for every photon of light.
There’s a significant amount of barrel distortion at 6.3mm/28mm, too, and when it matters I use the ImageAlign plugin to correct that, round-tripping the file through Photoshop CS2. I believe ImageAlign has been discontinued but similar native functionality exists somewhere deep in the bowels of Photoshop CS3. Unless your subject is one dictating straight lines, it’s generally not an issue.