May I introduce you to one of the least know and yet most superb lenses Canon makes. You probably even stumbled on to this page by accident, looking for another Canon lens, looking at various macros, or even just intrigued by this higher-priced lens you've probably never even considered.
Let me just say this about this lens: Ultra sharp. Ultra colorful. Ultra contrast. Ultra solid.
Like everybody else, I initially bought this lens for its macro. The 60mm and 100mm options were a lot cheaper, but my collection is entirely L-class and I'd learned to trust putting gobs of money into the lenses with the red ring. So I put my money where my L-faith is and went with this lens. Needless to say, my faith was rewarded again.
Yeah, sure it's got the 1.0x macro capability, and this is important. But what I wasn't expecting was the image quality. It is unbelievably good. Now I'm not somebody who's taking his first trip into L land and comparing this lens to the $300 run-of-the-mill glass. I've used six L-class lenses significantly and I'm comparing this lens' image quality to THOSE.
You will find yourself using this lens as much as its 180mm focal length and f/3.5 aperture dictates. The lens is versatile both as a super-fine telephoto and as a 1.0x macro.
The macro capability is the main feature. 1.0x macro literally means that a 35mm wide object will completely fill a 35mm frame. Basically, it's a small microscope. If you dare to dial in the aperture to the wide-open f/3.5, the DOF is approximately that of the thickness of two sheets of writing paper at 1.0x. Needless to say, you'll need a tripod, preferably with macro rails that slide forwards and rearwards for ultimate control.
(For those of you new to macro, focusing the lens changes the magnification factor. So as one focuses the object, the object's size in the viewfinder changes. This is why I mention the macro rails, they allow you to achieve focus and physically move the lens/camera in and out to reachieve the desired composition.)
As a telephoto, due to this lens' superb image quality, it actually produces images of a much greater quality than the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS. (I know firsthand, as I own it too) The difference is in the 70-200mm's versatility. If the light drops too low, the f/2.8 and the IS bests the f/3.5 quite rapidly. If the distance of subjects change quickly or you are unable to move your feet to frame images, the 180mm will be too constricting and the zoom will win. But under conditions where the 180mm f/3.5 can perform unhindered (such as at an airshow or out flower hunting), it will consistantly produce brighter, more saturated, and sharper images than the 70-200mm F/2.8 IS.
There is a complaint that circulates about the slow speed at which this lens autofocuses, expecially annoying when trying to be used as a telephoto. This is actually incorrect. The lens' autofocus drive does infact move very quickly, but it must traverse all the way from infinity to about 4" in front of the lens to find the subject. This is where the wait time comes into effect. Here's the solution: utilizing the AF limiter switch allows you to limit the AF search to only between infinity and about 5' in front of the lens. Consequently, this range is about 10% of the focus range (the other 90% is in between that 5' and the 4"). I no longer experience AF "hunting" problems when trying to use the 180mm as a telephoto.
Some other info about this lens:
The front objective element is actually concave. I think this is the only L lens Canon makes with a concave front element. It's probablyexpensive to replace if an accident should occur, so utilize a UV filter (72mm filter size). I recommend only the B+W or Hoya Multi-coated brands. (Yes they're pricey, but worth it)
The hood for this lens is actually a little too small in my opnion. If shooting a backlit object, I sometimes get the heavy orange glow in the viewfinder soI am forced to use my hand as a "hood extender" and block the sunlight.
For its size, this lens is relatively lightweight. It is much lighter than the 70-200mm F/2.8L IS and easily handholdable for extended periods of time.
This lens is compatible with Canon's extenders. I have personally used it with the 1.4x extender. The results are excellent. While CA and sharpness degrade noticeably on the 70-200mm, this lens shows barely a difference in image quality, except for the change in designation to a 252mm F/5, of course. And add to the fact that the macro capability is now gone from 1.0x to 1.4x, a big bonus.
So for whom does this lens apply?
-Those who neither have a macro or a telephoto prime who desire a single piece that can handle both aspects with excellent results.
-Those who plan on performing professional product photography.
-Those that are looking into serious nature photography (packing this lens with a wide-angle is pretty much all you'll need on a day hike).
What this lens does not do well:
-Low-light photography.
-Event photography.
-Landscapes.
Alternatives:
-60mm/100mm: lesser image quality, less telephoto compression in macro images, no real double-duty as a telephoto, but a whole lot cheaper and wider aperture.
-MP-E 65mm: much greater magnification (5.0x), lower image quality, no telephoto capability, odd design means studio use almost exclusively
0 comments:
Post a Comment