Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Official: Canon EF-M 28mm f3.5 IS STM Macro.
#11
It's the other way round, Klaus: For a 130 grams lens, a metal mount is overkill. And if I remember what I saw inside my broken 56/1.2 Fujinon with metal mount, I have to say, a metal mount fixed on plastic with 3 tiny screws is also no guarantee for durability Wink

#12
I was about to point out that error in taxonomy, but you beat me to it. Big Grin

Quote:Technically, spiders are not insects  Wink  :lol:

Rover, what brand/quality were those extension tubes?

 
As to what brand the tubes were... probably Aputure. Serves me right for choosing outright junk (and for not supporting the lens by the tripod ring at all f'n times). I got out with less damage than I could have... for what it's worth the lens might've fallen off the cliff, or onto some hard stone. It did get some sand inside so for a minute or so the zoom action was grinding. The mentor at the photo tour I was taking said "Hmph... just keen on spinning it, something's gotta get ground down - either the sand or the lenses inside".

#13
Quote:Technically, spiders are not insects  Wink  :lol:

 
 

Next time I call them "more than 4-legged little buggers"  B)  Tongue

 

I was thinking about a little grashoper which foams himself before he goes into metamorphosis, but that bug I shot with a Sigma Merrill.
#14
Quote:Next time I call them "more than 4-legged little buggers"  B)  Tongue

 

I was thinking about a little grashoper which foams himself before he goes into metamorphosis, but that bug I shot with a Sigma Merrill.
More than 6-legged  :ph34r:
#15
Some lenses make a certain platform interesting, just for that lens. Like a Canon EOS 100D/SL1 and EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM. Or a Fuji X camera with either version of the 56mm f1.2. Or then this, an EOS M with this EF-M 28mm f3.5 IS STM Macro.

 

Thinking about it, the Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8 was such a lens too (it has gotten competition meanwhile). And the Canon MP-E 65mm macro.

#16
Quote:Next time I call them "more than 4-legged little buggers"  B)  Tongue

 

I was thinking about a little grashoper which foams himself before he goes into metamorphosis, but that bug I shot with a Sigma Merrill.
"Arthropods" would be pretty accurate but, of course, too boring. Smile

You are probably referring to this species of insects - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philaenus_spumarius - which is actually a cicada rather than a grasshopper. Smile
#17
Meadow froghoppers hopp in grass, don't they?

 

Big Grin

 

I never saw them hopping, only taking a selfmade foam pack round themselves.

 

Oh, and Arthropods would mean a lot animals. Maybe it's simpler to stick with cats...

#18
Two sample pictures, taken with this little gem.

The first one (IMG 5533) was taken using the LED lights.

#19
TeeGee -

 

If you have this lens, lets see this so-called "Super Macro", or at least 1:1!  It sounds like an interesting lens.  I wish people would include working distance whenever they provide MFD. 

 

I am not really up to speed on EF-M cameras.  If the theory of EF-S is that a smaller registry distance make it easier to develop wide angle lens, then why aren't there better wide angle lenses?  Personally, I'd like to see this lens in EF-S (if possible) so it could be used on a good camera.


EF-S has two primes (not counting EF lenses).  The 60mm f/2.8 macro, which I like a lot, and the 24mm f/2.8 Pancake.  Since they are the only two primes for EF-S, I thought it fitting that they be given metal mounts and legitimate focusing motors.  So I have to agree with Klaus, while, maybe, unnecessary, it really doesn't inspire confidence when they put a plastic mount on a lens.  I bit the bullet when I bought the EF-S 10-18mm because it is considered a good lens.  But the plastic mount does bother me.


I don't think I subscribe to the focal length makes no difference in a macro lens.  It's really hard to see the differences when tubes and teleconverters and close-up filters enter into it.  I like that Klaus mentioned the actual focal lengths, if I remember right, when comparing certain 100mm-ish macro lenses.  It is also known that the f-stop really is not as stated at macro distances.  So, the Canon EF 100mm IS USM L lens is really a 75mm f/4 lens at 1:1 distances. 


The only points I guess I want to make are, too bad they did not make such a lens for EF-S.  I suspect EF-S is what pays all the bills at Canon, so they should really show a little more love for EF-S customers.  But if they did, please, try not to make it look like a child's toy plastic lens!  And second, that I have been really curious to use a very short 1:1 macro lens.  I know the trickery used to attain 1:1 clouds the differences, but surely this is going to have interesting depth of field aspects. 

 

Brightcolours, I am not totally disagreeing with you.  You tube work is awesome, cutting edge stuff.  But tell me you don't want this lens!


Rover:  Sorry to hear about your disaster!  I know one should be careful and so on, but I pretty much never use the lens's tripod rings, mainly because they are usually at home.  So I could see the temptation to mount a tube, and when I use my 180mm macro lens, which is almost as big as your lens, I shoot it one handed all the time.  It's probably close to the weight of the lens you were using.  I know under the right (wrong?) circumstances I'd probably have tried it too.  Thanks for sharing your story.  It might save me from doing the same thing!

#20
If anyone is interested...

 

<p class="">Order Hemiptera - True Bugs, Cicadas, Hoppers, Aphids and Allies

<p class="">Suborder Auchenorrhyncha - Free-living Hemipterans

<p class="">Superfamily Cercopoidea - Spittlebugs

<p class="">Superfamily Cicadoidea - Cicadas, Leafhoppers, and Treehoppers

<p class="">Superfamily Fulgoroidea - Planthoppers

<p class=""> 

<p class="">And the bug in question is commonly referred to as a Spittlebug.  It sounds pretty un-glamorous but some are very cool looking.  Not to be confused with...


...Order Orthoptera, which is mainly grasshoppers, katydids, and crickets.  Also more beautiful than one would ever guess in their pre-macro lives.


<p class="">

 
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)