Canon 500D or Macro Lens
On a recent post I received a question over how the Canon 500D diopter compares with a true macro lens. When I first bought my camera, I knew I wanted to do macro but I didn’t have the money for a true macro lens. I wound up purchasing the Sigma 80-400 4.5-5.6 OS lens along with the 500D diopter. I quickly fell in love with macro photography and saved up for a true macro lens and once I had one I eventually sold the 500D. The following is a shot I took with the 500D when visiting the zoo with my kids.
However, let’s get more specific on the differences between a diopter and a true macro lens.
The above shot is one of my favorites from the 500D paired with the Sigma at 400mm. However, the above size doesn’t truly show the real sharpness. Here is a view at 100%.
When you compare it to the MP-E 65 and 180L shots from yesterday, this shot is nowhere near as sharp. There are several reasons for this.
- The telephoto lens I had on the camera, the Sigma 80-400 4.5-5.6 OS, was nowhere near as sharp as the MP-E 65 or the 180L. Keep in mind that when you use the 500D, the image will be no sharper than the sharpness of the lens you place it on – in fact it will be worse but we’ll get to that.
- Macro lenses are calibrated for short focus, while telephotos are usually calibrated for objects near infinity. Of course all good lenses should be sharp all around, but when designing macro lenses engineers pay particular attention to the sharpness for objects that are close in – as that is the main purpose of the lens.
- The 500D itself causes a loss in sharpness. This is one reason why extension tubes are often preferred – though they do not increase magnification greatly on a telephoto lens. Still, the 500D is a very good diopter and you will lose much less sharpness than simpler single element diopters.
Therefore, the 500D is not nearly as sharp as a true macro lens. Another large difference is the magnification. The true magnification that you receive with the 500D mounted on top of a telephoto varies with the layout of the optics within the lens, but I found that on the Sigma at 400mm I managed .75x at the highest magnification. With a shorter lens such as a 200mm, the magnification will be even less. Since true macro lenses start at 1x, you will get better magnification with a true macro lens than the 500D on a telephoto.
The following are other differences.
- A true macro lens is much faster. The 100mm is 2.8 and the 180mm is 3.5. The top telephotos are 2.8 but many are 5.6. Since you lose at least a full stop when you add the 500D, you wind up with f/4-f/8.
- You’ll generally find that the color contrast is much better with a macro lens.
- AF is slowed down significantly with the diopter on, though for the vast majority of photographs AF is not necessary.
Still, the following are the main advantages of the 500D.
- It is significantly cheaper than a true macro lens. A 77mm filter runs about $150, compared with the most often used macro lens – the 100mm 2.8 at almost $500.
- You can quickly switch to taking macro shots while taking other types of shots. I used to keep the 500D in my pocket while trying to photography birds. When I found a cool insect, I would quickly put the diopter on the lens and shoot away.
I often recommend that those interested in macro photography buy a 500D or extension tubes to see if they like macro photography before spending more on one or more true macro lenses. It tends to sell used for around $100 so if you decide that you no longer need it, you will only wind up paying $50.
No related posts.
Tags: 500d, advice, beginner, buy, canon, comparison, diopter, macro, photography