When I saw the macro distance of 0.49 feet inscribed on the side of my new 22mm EF-M lens, I decided I had to do a comparison with my real macro lens, a 100mm f/2.8. I have a sunflower I've been protecting from the deer all summer, and it finally flowered. Since it is in a pot, I transported it to the side of my shed where I took pictures both in shade and in sun, with flash and without, with both setups. These seem to be the two best images.
The first image is from the macro lens on the Canon 5D Mark III #8. Exposure was f/5.6, 1/400th, ISO 400, no flash. The second image is with the 22mm on the M100. Exposure was f/11, 1/60th, ISO 125, flash. Image quality of both is quite acceptable. I would need to equalize all the exposure parameters to determine whether the better background blur on the macro lens is an inherent advantage. I just checked the M100 and it was set to aperture priority, so that was my fault.
But absent another round of testing, I am assured that the 22mm lens can produce usable macro images of flowers. That's what I was trying to determine.
Update: The two sunflowers in that pot looked great on Sept. 2 and I thought about taking another portrait the following day. But there were a couple of windstorms on the 3rd and they got a little bit beaten up. And then, on the 4th, they were gone. A deer dipped its head into the cage and ate them. Never count on a photo opportunity being there later, take it now.
No comments:
Post a Comment