A new macro lens coming in the first half of 2025

#81
Probably before focus peaking has been enabled in Canon bodies.
I posted some examples I shot with the TSE 90mm

New Autofocus RF mount tilt-shift lenses expected after next round of camera announcements

I do not think tilt/shift would work for that unless the butterfly would stay perfectly still. Try stopping down your aperture. TSE 90mm +R5 handheld @f/4 https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/new-canon-tilt-shift-lenses-in-the-wild-cr2.42201/post-957753
www.canonrumors.com www.canonrumors.com
 
Upvote 0
#82
I prefer photographing small objects, which may or may not be alive and skittish, from a far enough distance so that you don't scare things off. That means a longer distance which requires a long focal range. For that, I loved the build and photos on my Olympus 300 f/4 pro lens with retractable lens hood. On my R5 I use the 100-500 f/4.5-7.1L which gives a bigger sensor and zoom (and more size & weight).

In a future Canon macro lens, assuming it would be a prime lens, I'd prefer a 600mm f/8 lens with 1:1 magnification (and great IS). Besides macro use at a wonderfully comfortable distance you'd get a great birding (etc) lens.

I doubt that Canon will come out with a zoom macro lens. My hope for the lens Canon actually comes out with is the 180mm 1:1 macro lens. It's probably the longest reach I can hope that Canon actually gives us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#83
usern4cr said:
I prefer photographing small objects, which may or may not be alive and skittish, from a far enough distance so that you don't scare things off. That means a longer distance which requires a long focal range. For that, I loved the build and photos on my Olympus 300 f/4 pro lens with retractable lens hood. On my R5 I use the 100-500 f/4.5-7.1L which gives a bigger sensor and zoom (and more size & weight).

In a future Canon macro lens, assuming it would be a prime lens, I'd prefer a 600mm f/8 lens with 1:1 magnification (and great IS). Besides macro use at a wonderfully comfortable distance you'd get a great birding (etc) lens.

I doubt that Canon will come out with a zoom macro lens. My hope for the lens Canon actually comes out with is the 180mm 1:1 macro lens. It's probably the longest reach I can hope that Canon actually gives us.
Click to expand...
Canon has a patent application for a 300mm f4 macro lens with 1:1 magnification. Add a 2* TC and you get a 600mm f8 with 2:1 magnification.
If this patent application ever turns into a product.

See: https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-patent-application-telephoto-macro-lenses/
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#84
P-visie said:
Canon has a patent application for a 300mm f4 macro lens with 1:1 magnification. Add a 2* TC and you get a 600mm f8 with 2:1 magnification.
If this patent application ever turns into a product.

See: https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-patent-application-telephoto-macro-lenses/
Click to expand...
I would be VERRRRRY happy if they came out with a 300 f/4 1:1 lens! If they did, I'd use it as is and absolutely love it!

I don't really like using TC's (they do lose image quality) as I would prefer to crop if I had to while enjoying the larger field of view if needed (that's like having a 2X zoom magnification during post processing). The upside of a TC is the hope for more detail in the smaller image. If I really needed that I think I'd just buy their best R APS-C body with higher pixel density in a smaller sensor - That is, the APS-C body would be the "teleconverter" for the lens without any new optical glass in the way. But the downside of that is having to deal with a different camera & menu interface, which I'd rather not have to deal with. So, again, I'm back to being happy with it as is and cropping if needed.

I think it would be a easier for Canon to offer a 300 f/4 1:1 instead of a 600 f/8 1:1 as it would probably sell better and be a lot closer to their old 180mm 1:1 macro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#85
usern4cr said:
I would be VERRRRRY happy if they came out with a 300 f/4 1:1 lens! If they did, I'd use it as is and absolutely love it!

I don't really like using TC's (they do lose image quality) as I would prefer to crop if I had to while enjoying the larger field of view if needed (that's like having a 2X zoom magnification during post processing). The upside of a TC is the hope for more detail in the smaller image. If I really needed that I think I'd just buy their best R APS-C body with higher pixel density in a smaller sensor - That is, the APS-C body would be the "teleconverter" for the lens without any new optical glass in the way. But the downside of that is having to deal with a different camera & menu interface, which I'd rather not have to deal with. So, again, I'm back to being happy with it as is and cropping if needed.

I think it would be a easier for Canon to offer a 300 f/4 1:1 instead of a 600 f/8 1:1 as it would probably sell better and be a lot closer to their old 180mm 1:1 macro.
Click to expand...
I hope (= deferred disappointment ;) ) for both the RF 180-200mm macro and the RF 300mm f4 macro. The 300mm macro would “replace” the EF 180mm with 1.4* extender for butterflies and dragonflies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#86
neuroanatomist said:
I was of that opinion as well, but ultimately I did switch and I have not found the issue to be problematic for me.
Click to expand...

I bought the new RF version right away. Liked the increased magnification ratio and for a long time never noticed the focus breathing. Figured it was a video guy's problem, not my issue.

But then I got into a little bit of stacking, and I've been frustrated a few times. What I discovered is that sometimes I can't effectively focus stack sets of images with the RF 100, unless I throw them over to Helicon, which does a really good job of adjusting the images for breathing before it stacks. It works, but is a significant worflow increase for those images.

Just happened to me Thursday when taking picture of a hexagonal-pored polypore mushroom. Had two shots that needed to be merged to get both the underside of the fruiting body and the stem in focus. These fruiting bodies get to be about 1.5 inches wide, and it was a nice worst-case scenario, as the outline of the mushroom for the stem frame was a few millimeters off in all directions. Helicon did a fantastic job of it, but it's a silly complex workflow to have to add just to merge two pics. Learning Helicon is a multi-hour affair. I had to use it for something else (slime molds), but a normal person isn't going to do that.
 
Upvote 0
#87
[email protected] said:
[…]. Learning Helicon is a multi-hour affair. I had to use it for something else (slime molds), but a normal person isn't going to do that.
Click to expand...
If we take ‘normal’ as ‘average’ or ‘top of the bell curve’, that person would likely not even own an ILC. People trying to use Helicon or Zerene are already a tiny fraction of photographers, let alone the general population :)

Having said that, Helicons UX is not intuitive and the fact that every situation can require a different algorithm isn’t helping it. It would be nice to have a old Topaz style split screen showing a portion of the image for all options, making it easy to pick the best one.

I’m waiting for someone to integrate all modern technologies like denoising, sharpening, blur detection and 3d reconstruction into one to create a one-click stacking app. Topaz partnering with Helicon would be a big step forward in that regard.
 
Upvote 0
#88
P-visie said:
Comparing the weight of the TS-E with the EF 180mm macro and possibly a new RF long macro is not correct:
  • TS-E 90mm with a 2* extender has a 5.6 aperture (vs f3.5)
  • No 1:1 magnification and
  • No AF
The Tilt and shift mechanism adds significant weight and bulk, e.g. the TS-E 135 f4 L weighs 50% more and is 20% longer than the EF 135mm f2 L.
Click to expand...
When you're shooting macro you usually stop down. Rarely is the maximum aperture size a significant factor though I'd agree it sometimes can be when shooting at lower magnifications. However, at lower magnifications, you do not need the tele-extender, so your maximum f-stop is f/2.8.

Also, you're confusing aperture and f-stop. Aperture is properly stated in millimeters, as the diameter of the entrance pupil. 2.8 is an f-stop, which is the ratio of focal length to aperture, and primarily of use when discussing exposure times.

Also, you've neglected my mention of the 250D or 500D closeup lenses. These make the lens's furthest ("infinity") focus 250mm and 500mm, and nearest focus far closer, about 25-30cm. That gives you .36x magnification. Adding a 25mm extension tube gets you up to 0.64x. Adding a tele-extender gets you up to 1.28x.

I don't think most people don't use AF for macro photography, instead setting the camera for the desired magnification, then moving the camera around until the focus is ideal.

Finally, I'm not proposing the TS-E 90/2.8 as a perfect substitute for a dedicated macro lens, so please stop complaining that it doesn't quite do this or that. I never SAID it does exactly the same things.
 
Upvote 0
#90
usern4cr said:
I doubt that Canon will come out with a zoom macro lens. My hope for the lens Canon actually comes out with is the 180mm 1:1 macro lens. It's probably the longest reach I can hope that Canon actually gives us.
Click to expand...
I'm quite sure that if Canon's making another long macro it will be 2x mag or more. So many non-dedicated macros are shooting up to 0.5x, and so many other manufacturers are above 1.0x.

I loved my 180/3.5, though the RF100Mac seems as good.

What I'm curious about is if Canon will release EF12 and EF25-type extension tubes. I think the close-up lens 250D and 500D are no longer official products but not sure why. It's the existence of niche tools like that, that most people don't need most of the time, that make the system of the market leader more compelling.
 
Upvote 0
#91
SwissFrank said:
I'm quite sure that if Canon's making another long macro it will be 2x mag or more. So many non-dedicated macros are shooting up to 0.5x, and so many other manufacturers are above 1.0x.
Click to expand...
The added magnification doesn't seem as important for the longer macro lenses. It is the short one where it counts.

SwissFrank said:
What I'm curious about is if Canon will release EF12 and EF25-type extension tubes.
Click to expand...
I suspect that with RF the nearest elements are so close to sensor that the added extension has much more effect on image quality than it did with EF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#92
SwissFrank said:
What I'm curious about is if Canon will release EF12 and EF25-type extension tubes. I think the close-up lens 250D and 500D are no longer official products but not sure why. It's the existence of niche tools like that, that most people don't need most of the time, that make the system of the market leader more compelling.
Click to expand...
I ran across my EF12 II and EF25 II tubes last night while pulling out my macro rail. Haven’t used them in a long time, but when I do it’s not for macro (have the MP-E when I need magnification) but rather for a shorter working distance with my 600/4 II. So I’ll hang onto the tubes while I have the lens.

The close-up lenses were discontinued long ago. Like extension tubes, there are 3rd party options. The ones from NiSi are reportedly good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#93
JKT said:
The added magnification doesn't seem as important for the longer macro lenses. It is the short one where it counts.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you're right, but I think interest doesn't suddenly vanish at some point. I think it's always of interest to any macro shooter as an option at least. My fifth grader wanted to see water bears so we got the 100Mac out but 1.4x just isn't enough to get a good look, they're like 20 pixels long. 30 would be a lot better.
 
Upvote 0
#94
SwissFrank said:
I'm sure you're right, but I think interest doesn't suddenly vanish at some point. I think it's always of interest to any macro shooter as an option at least. My fifth grader wanted to see water bears so we got the 100Mac out but 1.4x just isn't enough to get a good look, they're like 20 pixels long. 30 would be a lot better.
Click to expand...
That is not a question of magnification. It is about focal length. Most of us want more of that. ;)
On the other hand, it isn't that common you need to take 2:1 images from 1 m away.

If I put TC on the 180, I usually want more reach and won't be using it at 1:1 for the base lens. Using them with EF 100, I'm almost more likely to be after added magnification instead ... having left MP-E home.
 
Upvote 0
#95
Having used the EF-M28 this week, I really like the builtin lights. Making them brighter and dimmable would be a nice improvement.

Since the EF180L still works great, the things I miss is a short-ish, like 50mm, 1:1 macro lens. I have the EF50, but that is only 1:2 and sounds like a million angry hornets while focusing.
The M6II+EF-S60 works quite well in those situations, but the shutter slap makes it need much higher shutter speeds than desired.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
Need a Point & Shoot? Fujifilm to bring a fixed lens 100MP GFX rangefinder style camera in 2025
Replies
22
Views
2K
EricN
EricN
Canon Rumors
Report: The RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM is delayed until 2025
Replies
46
Views
4K
upallnight
U
Canon Rumors
A new wide angle Z lens is coming after the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z
Replies
44
Views
4K
Jacob Kelso
J
Canon Rumors
The Canon EOS R6 Mark III is “definitely” coming in Q1 of 2025
Replies
160
Views
13K
Traveler
T
Canon Rumors
Three new segments of EOS R cameras coming in 2025
Replies
247
Views
18K
neuroanatomist
neuroanatomist
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu