pixeldensity.net
hardware
reviews
technical photography
Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x
Macro
Full frame, manual focus, macro prime
lens
This is a completely unique lens. To my knowledge, it is the only lens to be
capable of greater than 1:1 magnification, achieving an astounding 5:1
magnification ratio. For those not in the know, this means that the size of the
subject in focus in the frame is 5 times smaller than the camera's sensor. For
example, on a full frame camera, at maximum magnification, a subject only 7mm
long can fill the frame. Without this lens, photographers have to resort to
extension tubes, bellows or complicated reverse lens mounting to garner larger
than life (> 1:1) magnification.
I will start by explaining exactly how difficult this lens is to use. The major
limitations of this lens are twofold. Firstly, this is a macro lens
exclusively, the 1-5x part of the name is to be taken literally. This lens cannot focus
to infinity and therefore cannot be used for normal non-macro photography. The
lens starts at 1:1 magnification (in focus frame is same size as the camera
sensor) with a small working distance, and finishes at 5:1 magnification with an
even smaller working distance. Secondly, the nature of the lens means that it
must extend massively (around 3 times its length) during focussing. This means
that the light entering the lens is greatly reduced at high magnifications. At
5x it becomes extremely dark and live-view is pretty much a must-have feature
just to be able to see what you're doing!
Before I go into detail about the handling and workings of the lens, I don't
want people reading this to think it is all going to be negative. This lens is
amazing. It opens up a whole new world that you can't even see with your naked
eye. It is not for beginners, it even frustrates me and I've been doing macro
photography for years. But if you can master it, the results you can get are
absolutely spectacular. Think of it as a portable microscope. I've watched a
snail embryo's heart beating through this lens, for nature photographers it
really highlights the breadth of the life around us.
Onto more handling points. I don't want to sound negative but I also don't want
to lull readers into a false sense of security, and buy a lens they might not be
able to use. In order to use this lens, you either need a very sturdy tripod (I
mean Gitzo or Feisol heavy duty beasts), or a specialised macro flash kit (Canon
released a special flash along with this lens specifically for use with it).
Without either of these, you will be constantly struggling with compromising
aperture, ISO and shutter speed. If using with a tripod, you will also need a
focusing rail. Now, I always thought of these things as a bit of a luxury, and
they do introduce a bit of vibration into the tripod setup, but for this lens it
is an absolute must have. I will explain.... Because of the extreme length
adjustments that occur during focussing, the perspective, magnification and
focusing distance change in such a way that the lens/camera setup must be
constantly moving backwards as the lens focuses ever closer. The working
distance decreases slower than the lens itself extends. It is the same
issue I had with the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 Macro, but on a much bigger scale. Add to
this, the fact that any adjustments you make will need to be accurate to less
than a millimetre, simply plonking the tripod slightly closer won't cut it.
The lens has a tripod collar, but it is permanently attached to the section of
lens closest to the camera body. It would have been nice to have it closer to
the centre for balance and reducing vibration, or further forwards than the
centre to make focusing easier (focusing rail may not have been quite as
necessary). Anyway, it is at the camera end of the lens, much like the Canon
100-400mm, it balances well when the lens is retracted, but is less practical
the more you extend the lens.
It does have one thing going for it in terms of practicality, that is the
superbly damped focusing ring. This lens is manual focus only, you might think
that is a bit old-fashioned, but honestly, you wouldn't want autofocus on this
lens. Firstly, it doesn't capture enough light to autofocus with. And secondly,
you wouldn't want to risk a "focus-hunt" which would cause the lens to squash
whatever it is you are photographing with the front element! Having it manual
only means it can be damped, and this makes things much easier when you are fine
tuning your focusing. Damped focusing rings allow much more precision.
Right, optics! You might notice the lack of a certain capital letter in the name
of this lens, namely "L". This technically isn't an L
class lens. My experience with the optics on this lens are that they certainly
stack up to the other L primes I have used. Sharpness is impressive right from
wide open, in the centre frame and edges. Chromatic aberration is also very well controlled. There is a catch, however,
diffraction.
In all lenses, diffraction occurs when the diaphragm closes smaller and smaller. How much of it is picked up and effects
image quality depends on the pixel density of the sensor. Higher density =
diffraction getting noticeable at larger apertures. But the same effect applies
to extending the lens. As you know, the f-number is simply a ratio of the
aperture size against the lens length. Since the lens' length is so dynamic,
having a single set of apertures would not represent the reality of the
situation. In much the same way as a zoom lens will have a range of native
apertures as it extends. Canon provides an equation to calculate the "effective
aperture" of the MP-E 65mm.... Effective F-Number = F-Number x (Magnification +
1)
This means that in fact, this lens actually starts at f/5.6 at 1x magnification,
and it's native aperture at 5x magnification is a whopping f/16.8. Now
you can start to see why you might have a problem with diffraction. For those
not familiar with the phenomenon, diffraction normally starts to degrade an
image noticeably at somewhere in between f/11 and f/16 (dependent on the pixel
density). Now I have to make a distinction between a design error and the
limitations of the laws of physics. It's not Canon's fault that it is nigh on
impossible to get a sharp image at 5x magnification, you'd have to blame the
laws of physics for that one. Much as you wouldn't blame a 400mm f/2.8 lens for
being heavy, this limitation is part and parcel of what it means to be a greater
than 1:1 magnification macro lens. So you need to understand it, and work around
it.
These values are just a guide of course, but here's where I started to notice
serious diffraction on my 5D Mk II sensor at different magnifications....
(different sensors will have slightly different results, but the pattern will be
the same)
1x - 2x - You are safe up to f/11, so similar to most lenses
3x - Diffraction is noticeable at apertures smaller than f/8
4x - Diffraction is noticeable at apertures smaller than f/5.6
5x - The only "safe" apertures to use lie in between f/4.0 and f/5.6, although
you won't get any super sharp results even with these values. At f/8 diffraction
is horribly problematic. I would steer clear of using 5x magnification
altogether unless the subject is so interesting as to transcend image quality.
Stick to 4x I say.
Now, again I don't want to sound entirely negative, but I have to mention bokeh
quality (out of focus areas). This area is especially important in macro lenses
because you almost never get the whole image in focus. Unfortunately, Canon have
opted for a diaphragm of only 6 blades (albeit circular blades). This means that
at f/2.8, your bokeh will be silky smooth and circular, but once stopped down,
any background elements will be rendered in chunky hexagonal forms. This means
you need to put extra consideration into framing the background to minimise this
distraction. The simplest way is to just bring your subject further away from
the background, eliminating any detail whatsoever. But this isn't always a
possibility. I recommend using depth of field preview to avoid disappointment.
So in conclusion, this lens will open up whole new worlds of subjects and allow
you to get images that other photographers just cannot. Unfortunately, it is not
a lens for the inexperienced, the impatient or those who aren't technically
minded. It has many issues that need to be worked around, some technical, some
simply down to the laws of physics, but it does yield amazing results when you
get to grips with it. It is very sharp, and can provide professional quality
images when used properly. And let's not forget
that this is the first and only lens of it's type.
The values below are very subjective, and ignore the 'amazingness' factor! (In
which it would score 10/10). If you have read the whole review then you should
have an idea of whether you feel you would be able to tackle this challenge. And
this lens is a challenge, but a very rewarding one.
No - it's not a typo, I have marked cropped frame image quality lower than full
frame for a reason. In this lens, diffraction is more of an issue than corner
and edge sharpness, and so it puts it in a unique class of lenses that actually
perform better on a full frame! - A cropped frame camera will almost always have
a higher pixel density than a full frame one, hence the assumption. Again, this
is subjective, there are some (mostly older) cropped frame cameras with low
pixel densities.
Image Quality (full frame) - 7/10
Image Quality (cropped frame) - 6/10
Build Quality - 10/10
Practicality - 3/10
Value for Money - 7/10