Both shots were taken with the MT-24EX mounted and were at 1/200 second at apertures of f/11.  The camera used was the Canon 5D.  One shot was taken with the 180L while the other was taken with the MP-E 65.  With both shots, I took a number of the same subject so I then took the best representative shot from each set.  The following are the two test shots.

I hope it is obvious which shot was taken with the 180L and which was taken with the MP-E 65.

Let’s take a look at both of these shots at 100%.

At 100%, both shots still look fairly good.  The top one, of course, is the MP-E 65.  Here’s the result at 200%.

Try to keep in mind that the eye is larger from the MP-E 65 shot because the shot was taken at a higher magnification than the 1x of the 180L.  It does appear that they are quite close.  Here is the shot of the 180L magnified to 300% – where the eye is roughly the same size as that in the MP-E 65.

Obviously the MP-E 65 version is sharper, but that one is at 200% vs this one at 300%.  In my opinion if I had to pick a winner it would be the MP-E 65, due to the detail in the facets of the eye vs the detail of the top of the head on the shot from the 180L.

In truth though this is neither a scientific nor a very fair test.  With all of the gear I had on the camera, I should try to see if I can take shots higher than 1/200th with the 180L – perhaps with high speed flash sync – to see if that improves the sharpness.  Certainly there is a higher chance of camera shake with the 180L and the Wimberley brackets than with the MP-E 65.  Also, to be entirely fair both shots should have been at 1x – though the MP-E 65 is actually sharper at 1x than at 2x.

This also does not give an indication of how well these lenses work with a 21MP sensor, which I hope to show in a few months.  In the end, I may not have proven anything here but I hope to have given you an idea of the sharpness of the 180L.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

First of all, you have to be very realistic about the place you are going to?  What types of macro pictures will you really take there?  While macro photography can be done anywhere, some types of trips make certain types of macro photography difficult.  For instance, my wife and kids generally will not sit around and wait while I setup a tripod to take a picture of a flower.  While I occasionally use a tripod for my flower pictures in gardens around Seattle, I never use a tripod for macro photography on vacation (I do use one for sunrise/sunset and night shots though).  The following are my experiences on different types of vacations.

Jungle adventures – I spent some time in the rainforests of Peru before I had an SLR.  One of the members of my group brought an SLR together with a 50mm macro lens.  He expected to get close shots of army ants but came back without a single decent macro shot.  There were several problems with his approach.

1. He had no prior experience with macro photography.  When on vacation, I find that I need to move quickly for my macro shots.  The time to learn is back home – not on the road.
2. The 50mm macro is one of the worst lenses you can take with you on vacation.  It simply does not offer the distance you need to get the shot right.
3. Unless you really know what you’re doing, you don’t want to be that close to army ants.  Fortunately he was not bitten, but when starting out with army ants I suspect I would try a 180mm first.
4. He had no lighting equipment.  He did have a tripod, but this won’t help much with quickly moving army ants.
5. The group kept moving.  He never had time to properly attempt much because the tour guide kept us moving.

Jungle trips are one of the best places to take macro shots, but you will need ample time to perfect your technique before going there and you’re best shot at good macro pictures will be in the vicinity of your hotel.  Unless you are on a photography specific tour (and even then) the tour guide will keep you moving.  You will not have time to stop and get the ideal macro shot, except during down times when you can check around the camp.

Tropical trips – These are trips to tropical countries where you stay in hotels instead of camps that are usually in built up areas.  While tropical locations do have excellent opportunities for macro photography, you will still find that your best opportunities are in the vicinity of the hotel.  Therefore I highly recommend that you choose a hotel that is located closer to nature.  For instance, when traveling to Singapore, stay in Sentosa rather than in the city.  In Bangkok, I found a number of opportunities at the Marriott – which is located in the city but has ample gardens.  Many resorts not located in cities are already close to nature – but make sure to not choose one that uses pesticides or your subjects will be few (except for flowers of course).

European trips – For the most part, these aren’t the best trips for macro.  I’m sure there are some areas where you can find some interesting subjects, but unless you are staying out in the country you’re unlikely to find great subjects.  When I travel to Europe, I generally leave most of my macro equipment at home.

In general I find that I do not have much time to take my macro shots when on vacation.  I do sometimes take walking trips for an hour or so while my wife and kids relax in the hotel, but I certainly don’t have the time to setup a tripod and get things exactly right.  Therefore, I highly recommend that you take a form of macro lighting with you on vacation.  The best choice is the MT-24EX.  I won’t go into detail here about the advantages of this flash, but while on vacation I constantly have it on my camera if I am using any of my macro lenses.

Of course, this means that you have another thing to carry.  This has caused a number of problems for me as I do not have a large backpack and don’t want to carry an extra large backpack when I am on vacation.  Therefore, I often divide my equipment into two camps – macro equipment and non-macro equipment.  When I am out and about visiting sites, I generally have the non-macro equipment.  When I am walking around the hotel, I generally have my macro equipment.  As I have already stated, the vast majority of my macro photography is done near the hotel.  When I am out and about I simply don’t have the time and most of the subjects are not macros.

So now you have the lighting, but which lens do you take?  In my experience, most people who have a macro lens have the 100m 2.8.  This is an excellent macro lens and is always the lens I recommend to people getting started.  On vacation, I think this lens is the ideal choice with a cropped frame camera.  However, with a full frame camera I think it falls a bit short.

The main problem I have run across while on vacation is I never know what I will want to photograph.  For instance, on a recent trip to Mexico I was photographing a flower by a bridge.

Suddenly, I heard a pack of coatis.  I didn’t know how much time I would have with them, so I dared not change a lens.  Besides, the only other lens I had on me at the time was a wide angle lens – I had left my telephoto in the hotel to make room for the macro.  Luckily, I had the Canon 180L mounted on my camera at the time.  I turned on auto-focus and took several frames of the coatis.

If I had the 100mm 2.8 at the time, I would have had a much more difficult time getting this shot due to the shorter focal length.  On a cropped frame camera, where the 100mm macro is really a 160mm lens, I don’t think the difference is as important – though the 180L will still prove to be all the more versatile.  This lens served this purpose multiple times on vacation and is now my favorite macro lens for vacations.  Granted, it is a much heavier lens than the 100mm, but it is also more useful.  Also, a number of animals are a bit shy (such as the lizard above) and difficult to get too close to.  The 180L makes it much easier.

Keep in mind that I am not advocating you do most of your wildlife photography with the 180L.  On my last vacation to Mexico I used the Canon 70-200 4L IS to take most of my coati and bird shots.  The extremely quick AF in that lens allowed me to get more keepers.  However, my images from the 180L were a bit sharper.  Still, when I had the 70-200 that was the lens of choice as the 180L has very slow AF – even with the focus limiter.  This isn’t really a drawback of the lens – it’s not really intended for that purpose anyway.  What the 180L did offer though was the ability to switch quickly from larger wildlife to smaller critters.

What about the MP-E 65 that I currently use for a majority of my macro shots?  While I love this lens, for standard vacations it is not very practical.  This lens requires a lot of patience and time to get a good shot – even with a macro flash attached.  I simply don’t have that kind of time when on vacation.  I wound up not taking a single picture with it on vacation.  I did put it on the camera a few times, but most of the subjects I found were flowers that required the 180L.  It also didn’t help that the hotel used pesticides and as a result insects were hard to find.  Lizards, on the other hand, were in large supply – but the 180L was required because they were skittish – and too large to be photographed with the MP-E 65 anyway.

For future vacations, I will likely leave the MP-E 65 at home unless I am going on a tropical vacation where the hotel is in close proximity to the jungle – and the hotel does not use pesticides.

The last piece of equipment I take with me may be overkill for some, but I always take two Wimberley macro arms to hold the MT-24EX.  In general I find that putting the lights closer to the subject makes the lighting more pleasing.  Therefore I always use these together with my 180L.  The combined rig tends to scare some fellow tourists and I always receive a wise crack or two whenever I go out.  However, if you are using the 100mm 2.8 or shorter, I don’t think this is necessary.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The leaf in this shot is from me.  In a previous shot some commented that the red of the Japanese maple was too strong against the green of the stink bug.  Also, in this case the stink bug wasn’t in a very good spot to photograph so I used the leaf to move it.  One thing I have noticed is that the MT-24EX on the 180L can tend to be a bit too strong.  In this case the front of the stink bug is a bit too strongly lit.  Continue on for a comparison with a similar shot on the MP-E 65 and more stink bug experiments.

Here’s a very similar shot taken last year with the MP-E 65 and the MT-24EX.

This is the shot that others generally reviewed as having too strong of a contrast.  Contrast aside, note that the lighting on the stink bug is much softer here.  In both cases I used the exact same flash – MT-24EX – and in both cases the MT-24EX had Sto-fen diffusers.  I remember reading some time ago that in macro as the light gets further from the subject it actually becomes harsher.  This still doesn’t make sense to me but these shots seem to suggest that is true.  The fix, I hope, is a Wimberley macro flash bracket that will arrive at the end of this week.  I did try adjusting the position of the heads and the angles but I was unable to soften the light as much as the shot with the MP-E 65.

Getting back to my experiment, I then decided to try photographing the stink bug on my car.  The first one is from the top.

The blue of the car is a bit dark here, but I don’t think that’s too much of an issue as in previous shots it has the tendency to overpower things.  One thing to note is that pictures with my MP-E 65 brought out the blue much stronger, further indicating that I am currently not lighting the entire shot but just the bug.  Here’s a shot I took several weeks ago with the MP-E 65.

If this is the case, the Wimberley will probably not be the only solution but I should look into also firing a 580EX to light the background when taking macro shots with the 180L and MT-24EX.  In the past I have had problems firing the 580EX from the MT-24EX but I can probably now solve the problem with Pocketwizards.  Finally, I took advantage of the lighting from the combination to get the stink bug and its shadow.

So the moral is from this experiment that I need to work more with lighting when using this combo.  Things are a bit easier with the MP-E 65, but with the 180L more thought needs to be given to the background and to preventing harsh light on the subject.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Canon MP-E 65 – The only macro lens capable of going beyond 1x without extenders or extension tubes.

Canon 180L – The longest macro lens available for Canon.  Also considered to be the sharpest and the only one with an L designation.

Canon TS-E 90 – Not truly a macro lens (.33x) but the tilt and shift capabilities make this a very interesting lens.

I almost didn’t get a chance to play with the lens this weekend.  The package needed to be signed by an adult and, though Nelya was home that day, the UPS truck arrived while she was picking the kids up from school.  Luckily I was able to pick it up at the facility that evening, only to find that the order was messed up and I am still working at getting it corrected.  Luckily, the 180L was not one of the items messed up so I opened it immediately.

First, the build of the lens.  This lens is built like a rock and has the same finish and feel as the MP-E 65.  As a bonus, it comes with a sleek lens case that I have actually been using since I am out of room in my camera bag.  It seems that Canon has in general improved their lens cases, so I will be curious to see if future L lenses also come in the same type of case.

I have read a number of reviews where people complain about focusing with the 180L, but compared to the MP-E 65 it is a breeze.  It is so refreshing to not have to struggle to get the subject in focus.  The only difficult point so far is the fact that the 72C adapter, which will allow me to use the MT-24EX with the 180L, was part of the order that was messed up (not included in the box but I was charged for it).  While I wait for the adapter I have to take all shots with available light.  Eventually I plan to take some flower shots with a tripod, but I haven’t had a chance to work on those yet.

Because I had to shoot everything in ISO 400-800, there is a bit of noise on the shots so it is difficult right now to detect sharpness.  Also, I had to use a lower shutter speed than I would have liked so that also made the shots a bit blurry.  I will have more to say about the sharpness in the next few weeks.  In particular I am curious to see how it compares to the MP-E 65 at 1x.

One nice thing about the 180L is I can use it for subjects other than macros.  This is most useful when we take the kids to a playground.  Usually I search for bugs during part of the stay and then take some pictures of the kids.  Until recently, this required me to switch to my 70-200 4L IS, but now I can use the 180L if I want to.  However, this is not a fast autofocusing lens and the 70-200 leaves it in the dust in any comparison.  It does have a focus limiting switch, which does help AF, but the truth is this is a macro lens.  When taking macro shots, you never use AF so it isn’t that important.

So far I have only had about a half hour to use this in the field, with the shot above one of the results.  I happened to find two crane flies mating and quickly got a few shots off.  I did, however, notice that I can take shots of subjects that would ordinarily be scared away by the MP-E 65.  For instance, flies were much more approachable with this lens.  Eventually I plan to take some shots of dragonflies once they come out in full force.  I may even get bold enough to take some bee shots.

All in all this lens so far seems to be very well worth it.  In the next few weeks, when more of my accessories come in (including a Wimberley macro flash bracket that is on backorder) I will have more to say about this lens including details on the sharpness.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.