Lenses for dummies :P

[allysaurus]

So I have a Canon 1000d.. I bought it with the twin lens kit. Unfortunately I'm still a bit of a noob when it comes to lenses..

My boyfriend bought me a Canon EF 50mm f1.8 mkII for Christmas () and I'm also looking at Macro lenses.. Unfortunately I'm looking for under the $400 mark or around it.

I've noticed the Canon EF 50mm f2.5 Compact Macro lens. I'm just wondering if anyone knows the difference between the 50mm mkII f1.8 and the 50mm f2.5 macro lens?

I'd love the Canon 100mm 2.8 USM Macro however it's a little out of my price range hehe.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!!!

[Psychotik]

The 2.5 is a macro - the 1.8 is not.

Good starting point

[allysaurus]

Hehe yes thank you :P well I got that part. Are the two lenses too similar or would it still be worth getting the macro lens because it's macro, which is what i'm after?

[Bleemv1]

with the macro you'd be able to focus closer to the subject so maybe it's worth it? if that's what you want to shoot. I think there is a Tamron 90mm Macro. Not sure if that sits in your price range though

[Psychotik]

Originally Posted by allysaurus

Hehe yes thank you :P well I got that part. Are the two lenses too similar or would it still be worth getting the macro lens because it's macro, which is what i'm after?

I know nothing about macro lenses but from what I understand the macro lens will allow you to get extremely close to the subject and still focus, and have to focus very specifically on what you want to photograph - whereas the normal primes/zoom lenses might only let you focus on a subject from as far as a foot away for example.

You buy a macro lens if you want to do close-up photography.

[Dark Orange]

Yeah, I would suggest you look at another lens, it is no use having two similar lengths in your kit at this stage.

If you want to try macro work, consider a set of extension tubes. It's a cheap way to get up close and personal by using yur existing lenses.

[allysaurus]

Thanks very much for your replies. Yeah I thought the macro would do it's macro job but .. because I don't know much about lenses I started to get confused.. all the f1.8 and f2.5s confused me. I really need to do a photography course or something hehe.

I think I'll go for one of the Canon 50mm EF f2.5 Compact Macro lenses then.
Yahoo!

[Psychotik]

f1.8 and f2.5 refer to apertures of the lenses and have nothing to do with macro photography at all. They are the maximum 'speed' of the lens and will determine the depth of field in your shot. The smaller the stop (larger f-number means that more of the things in your photos will be in focus more of the time

[allysaurus]

Yes.. thank you
I've noticed most of the time the smallest (if that's the word) apperture on my 1000d is 5.6 however sometimes I can get it to 4.0. I think 3.6 has been the lowest. I can only sometimes reach these low numbers though, do you know why?

[Dexamenus]

Originally Posted by allysaurus

Yes.. thank you
I've noticed most of the time the smallest (if that's the word) apperture on my 1000d is 5.6 however sometimes I can get it to 4.0. I think 3.6 has been the lowest. I can only sometimes reach these low numbers though, do you know why?

Depends on the lens, you will probably get to 3.6 when you are at the widest focal length on your lens, but as you zoom, the aperture gets smaller, or the number gets bigger.

Has nothing to do with the camera at all

[Psychotik]

You have the kit lens that comes with the 1000D which I think is the same as mine, the 18-55mm IS f3.5-5.6?

That means the fastest you will be able to shoot is at f3.5 which means you will need to have fairly decent lighting most of the time. The lower that number the less light you need to be able to focus on your subject. You will get to 3.5 when you have lower light levels so the lens needs to open to its widest aperture to allow enough light in to focus. Has nothing to do with camera.

EDIT: beaten to it...

[allysaurus]

Thank you guys so much!

The lower that number the less light you need to be able to focus on your subject.

That's something I didn't know. Thanks

Also I got the twin lens kit without the IS so I have the 18-55mm and 75-300mm lenses.

Edit: hehe you both gave good explanations, I just happened to learn a little more from you Psychotik

[phreeky82]

The aperture is just like the size of the opening in the lens - how much light it lets through. There are also a bunch of blades inside the lens that can close up the gap within the lens (often called "stop down"). The lower the F-number, the more light gets in.

Big aperture (small F-number) mean more light in, and therefore a faster shutter speed. Will also mean a more shallow depth of field (google that term). The opposite is also true with a small aperture.

Now, as for specific lenses. Macro lenses typically allow 1:1 magnification - this means that when you get as close to the subject as you can while still focusing on it, the size of the object will be the same size as the sensor within the camera. A longer focal length macro lens will allow you achieve that from a greater distance.

As for the 50mm F/2.5, it's not a true macro - it allows only 1:2 magnification. And you already have a 50mm, so for non-macro lenses it wouldn't get much use. I'd suggest something else.

The Tamron 90mm is probably a good choice.

[allysaurus]

Originally Posted by phreeky82

The aperture is just like the size of the opening in the lens - how much light it lets through. There are also a bunch of blades inside the lens that can close up the gap within the lens (often called "stop down"). The lower the F-number, the more light gets in.

Big aperture (small F-number) mean more light in, and therefore a faster shutter speed. Will also mean a more shallow depth of field (google that term). The opposite is also true with a small aperture.

Now, as for specific lenses. Macro lenses typically allow 1:1 magnification - this means that when you get as close to the subject as you can while still focusing on it, the size of the object will be the same size as the sensor within the camera. A longer focal length macro lens will allow you achieve that from a greater distance.

As for the 50mm F/2.5, it's not a true macro - it allows only 1:2 magnification. And you already have a 50mm, so for non-macro lenses it wouldn't get much use. I'd suggest something else.

The Tamron 90mm is probably a good choice.

Now that's the answer I was looking for! Thank you for explaining those 1:1 and 1:2 ratios for me also, I wondered what those meant in regards to macro lenses.

Yes I figured because I will have one 50mm lens that maybe I shouldn't get a macro 50mm lens as well...

Fortunately I know what depth of field means and I love playing around with it

[Psychotik]

Originally Posted by allysaurus

Thank you guys so much!



That's something I didn't know. Thanks

Also I got the twin lens kit without the IS so I have the 18-55mm and 75-300mm lenses.

Edit: hehe you both gave good explanations, I just happened to learn a little more from you Psychotik

Hehe no probs. I've only been doing this since August so I'm fairly new to SLR's myself. It took a while to get my head around but I understand these basics myself. Only too glad to help you, as I was in exactly your shoes! Have this fantastic new toy and not know how to use it properly.