I heard there is no autofocus for the video mode in D90. You have to focus only manually.

i exactly dont know on that stuff...it can also be fun to manually focus for video.

It would be very difficult to shoot a moving object with manual focus. It would be very easier if you have autofocus at these instances.

Of course, you have lot of advantages, you can be creative by controlling many parameters of the video, including depth of field, WB, etc. The variety of lenses give you a wide range of oppurtunity to shoot movies.

I think the Canon 5D MarkII is superior in the movie shooting aspect.

Yes, you are right. If you want to shoot video clips with the D90, all you've got is manual focus! It's NOT like our regular P&S cameras.

But, a D-SLR that has got video recording capabilities is phenomenal. Just imagine the possibilities with interchangeable lenses!

Could anyone from Delhi please share the information as to where can I get the MP-E 65 from? I have enquired at the two famous gray markets (Chandni Chowk & Palika Bazaar), but they haven't even heard the name of that lens, forget stocking it!

One other option which I was just thinking of is perhaps getting it online through Amazon. But, it seems they do not ship optics (lenses, cameras, etc.) to India. What other option have I got??

Guys any idea about Panasonic Lumix FZ18. Is it better than Sony H50, Nikon P80, Olympus UZ570 or Canon S5IS...

Check out FZ28k.

hmm wich is the best digicam in the market within the budget of 9k

Yep, it is superior. It can shoot HD videos not stop for 12 mins. Even the canon does not have auto focus in video mode.

Hi Aryan,

Firstly I would not recommend purchasing from the US and getting it shipped to India. The cost of shipping + customs would increase the price significantly. Have you tried contacting Canon India and tried to get it from official market.

As for palika and chandni chowk, which retailers did u check with? I called my contact at palika and he told me that he would get back to me with the details on availablity and pricing for the lens. If you want, i can introduce you to him for any grey market purchases. Most probably you would need to get this lens on order and have to typically pay 50-100% advance.

As for the lens itself, I would still suggest that you check out super macro setups using a 70-300mm zoom + a 58mm lens reversed. If you are interested, you can try out my kit one of these days and see the challenges associated with the shooting of high magnification scenes. IMO just getting a subject on the viewfinder is a major hassle at these magnifications.

I would suggest that in place of getting the MPE-65 at this point, consider getting a cheap sigma 70-300mm w/ the 1:2 macro mode + the canon macro twin light. Then practice with this kit for a few months and get the MPE-65 only if you still feel you need the better optical quality of the MPE-65. My experience has been that for the kind of super macro shots that I do, which is essentially experimenting just for fun, the reversed lens combo works great.

The most essential parts of a macro rig, imo are:
a. patience - esp if you are going to be shooting anything that can move even a bit
b. A sturdy tripod - at extreme magnifications, you just can not hand hold the camera and even with a sturdy tripod with its head totally locked down, i have faced big changes in composition by just touching the camera, when doing the flower shots i posted earlier.. Even finding the subject is a major headache with extreme macro setups
c. A bright light - unless you are shooting under some extremely bright video lights, mostly this would mean an electronic flash or studio strobes. A dedicated external flash + sync cord or wireless trigger is required as you need to typically take the flash off camera and position it near the lens. Canon makes an excellent macro twin light that gives awesome lighting. If you want to do handheld macro photography, then this is kinda required. Nikon has the R1C1 kit which does similar stuff. I normally use a regular dedicated flash with wireless sync for lighting my macro subjects.

Besides this, you would also perhaps want some additional equipment to do much macro photography:
a. One or more focusing rails
b. A geared tripod head - this helps a lot when you need to fine tune your composition. A regular pan & tilt head is just about ok, while a ball head is at times a major pain when doing extreme closeups
c. A flash bracket arm - john shaw described a simple method of making one at home in his book closeups on nature
d. A copy stand or something similar if you want to do extreme close ups of flat objects.

-- no1lives4ever
PS: this post is not to discourage you from getting the MPE-65, but to think about other things that you might need to make full use of that lens. If you have the budget, then get the MPE-65 + canon twin macro light.

@no1: Thanks a lot for that insightful post about the whole macro setup with and without the MP-E. I would like you to introduce me to this contact of yours. Or better still, if he has said he would get back to you with the exact pricing of the lens, then nothing like it. According to Amazon, it's about $860 or thereabouts.

I am also against getting it from US and shipping it to India since the shipping charges are damn expensive (comparatively speaking). As for the "reverse" setup, I am not too sure whether I can get a 70-300 (or the equivalent in Canon) and then reverse mount a 50mm lens and then shoot. This is way too much for me! Instead I would absolutely love to bolt on a macro lens and start off!

If I somehow don't get the MP-E (which would be purely because of unavailability only.. ), then the next best option for me would be the 100mm f2.8 macro (1:1). And yes, I would absolutely love to try your setup atleast once, just to get the hang of the whole thing that you have mentioned.

As for the macro flashes, yes, once I get the lens, then I would be getting the MT 24EX flash as well, which would surely help as far as clicking pictures in higher magnifications (2x and beyond) is concerned..

If you are going to be photographing nature subjects using a macro lens, then very seriously consider getting the 180mm canon or sigma macro lens. The newer 100mm lenses which go to 1:1 have very small working distance and makes some types of photography really challenging. I have a MF 105/2.8 Nikon Macro and while this requires an extension tube to go down to 1:1, even then the working distance is pretty small. At 1:1 this lens gives me a working distance only slightly worse than that of a modern 180mm or 200mm macro lens that goes to 1:1.

A few more options you can consider for macro:
1. Sigma or tamron 70-300mm zoom with 1:2 macro mode
2. Canon 70-300 IS or 70-300 DO IS lens with a Canon 500D lens

And finally before you really get into macro, do read john shaw's closeups on nature. This is an old book and has a lot of info on film and non ttl flash, but the photos and the wide variety of setup and practical suggestions for field macro photography makes this even today around 20 years after it was published originally one of the best guides for macro photography. It does not give you any details on the tricks you can pull off with digicams or DSLRs, and if I remember correctly almost no close up pics of insects, but the book surely helped me a lot and showed to me that a dedicated macro lens is not really required for a lot of situations.

-- no1lives4ever
PS: How about a separete thread for macro photography. There is enough interest to make it a different universal thread here on xbhp

@no1: Thanks again! Your posts are surely very informative and not to mention, helpful. I was thinking on the lines of the Canon 180mm macro lens as well, but I believe that would cost a bomb. Moreover, I am not too sure whether I would like to lug around such a huge lens for shooting macro subjects.

But, that being said, a positive thing about the 100mm and the 180mm is that it can be used as a normal telephoto lens as well, whereas the MP-E is just that - a macro lens; it JUST cannot focus more than a few inches...!!!

As for a separate thread for macro photography is concerned, let's keep whatever discussions we will be having in this thread only. After all xBhp is primarily a motorcycling website. We have got this thread as a bonus (if I may say so!!)..

P.S: Keep the information flowing. It's really good to read and know so much about the thing I love the most - macro!

The best macro lens is 100mm out of the three Canon macros (60mm,100mm,180mm). I have that one. Its a 2.8 and costs around 20k gray, which is not much.

Also the Tamron Macros usually have an extending front element which can scare away the insect, Canon has USM, so its quieter and the container is long enough to accommodate the lens assembly without external rotation.

Depending on the use, the best macro lens can be any of the 3 you mention. Personally I would want to have a 180 or 200mm macro lens for outdoor photography. The greater working distance and the ability to isolate backgrounds more easily is a big plus. The 60mm lenses are typically optimized for flat field reproduction and are best used for photographing flat objects like paintings, maps, stamps, coins, etc. They used to be very popular for slide duplication. The 100mm lenses are typically a good compromise between these 2 extremes.

As far as lens quality goes, you can not really go wrong by getting any dedicated macro lens. The Tamron 90mm is one excellent lens and so are the sigma macro lenses. The Nikon and Canon macro lenses are also excellent. The main problem is that all of these lenses are very expensive!

As per most users of the lens, the ideal macro lens for nature photography is none of the above but the now discontinued 70-180 zoom macro lens from Nikon. The zoom feature of the lens makes composition in the field a lot easier than using a straight fixed focal lens. Having used my 70-300 with a closeup filter and also a dedicated macro lens, i would fully agree with this assessment. Now to find a used copy of this lens in good condition at a rate that is not daylight robbery!

Unless one does a lot of macro, for a lot of photographers on a budget a 70-300 or 70-200 zoom with a close up diopter like the Canon 500D makes a lot of sense. The results obtained with a good 70-200 zoom and a Canon 500D dipoter is almost as good as that from a dedicated macro lens. The only downside of this combo is that at close focusing range, the short throw of the focusing rings makes focusing a big challenge at times.

All modern macro lenses are internal focus variety which focus down to 1:1 by shortening the focal length of the lens. This has 2 effects:
1. By changing focus, you change the focal length and the magnification, so to use these lense, you typically need to set the magnification factor on the lens manually (based on the subject) and then focus by moving the camera - AF is kinda useless in a macro lens.
2. The actual working distance is greatly reduced compared to a non internal focus macro lens of the same focal length.

The macro lenses which move the entire lens assembly are typically better in this regard and in those lenses the focus ring can be used for minor focusing after composing the scene w/o greatly affecting the composition.

I got myself a second hand 105/2.8 Nikkor Manual focus macro lens because lens does not change focal length when focusing closer and since macro work is almost always done w/o AF, the MF focusing makes this lens really nice to use in the field. On a reduced frame DSLR, this lens behaves as good as a IF 180-200mm macro lens on a full frame film camera. The only problem with this nikkor is that to go beyond 1:2, one needs to use either a close up lens or an extension tube.

Here is an image I took using the 105/2.8 (I had posted this earlier in the old photography thread) - Notice that even with the 105mm lens, the background was not really isolated very much and still looks a bit cluttered:


-- no1lives4ever