Canon 65mm f/2.8 Macro MP-E
1x-5x Review |

|
The Canon 65mm MP-E is the only macro
lens currently in production that is able to
reach 5:1 without extension tubes or any
other accessory. Five to one! This is a
pretty crazy magnification, and if you add
an APS-C camera body, you get so much
magnification that you can fill the frame
with the eye of a fly! I already used this
lens in the past - and I loved it - but now
I have decided to do an in depth review with
MP-E on 7D.
Many thanks to my friend Sandro
who loaned me this lens!
As usual, I recommend to give a look to
the page
Testing and reviewing a lens: it will
help you to understand better this review
and my testing methodology!
Specifications
(compared the Canon 180 Macro)
|
|
|
Canon Canon 65mm f/2.8 MP-E
|
Canon 180mm f/3.5 Macro L USM
|
|
Focal length
|
65 mm
|
180 mm
|
|
Macro ratio
|
from 1x to 5x (5:1)
|
1x (1:1)
|
|
Max Aperture
|
f/2.8
|
f/3.5
|
|
Stabilization
|
No
|
No
|
|
Autofocus
|
not available (MF only)
|
Ultrasonic AF Motor
|
|
Closest Focus
|
0.24 meters
|
0.48 meters
|
|
Dimensions
|
81 (D) x 98 (L) mm
|
83 (D) x 187 (L) mm
|
|
Weight
|
740 g
|
1090 g
|
|
Weather sealing
|
No
|
No
|
|
Price
|
$ 950 (+ $500 or $ 730 for flash)
|
$ 1370
|
|
Production
|
1999-
|
1996-
|
|
Built quality and autofocus
Even though it is not labeled as "L", the built quality is nothing short of
professional - on par with the Canon 180
Macro L and other professional Canon lenses.
The guy who sticks "L" badges on Canon
lenses must have been at home the day Canon
came out with this lens, because the MP-E is
an L lens in every respect, both in terms of
image quality and built quality. The MP-E is
built in metal; it is not weather sealed (but
even the 180 Macro L has no sealing), overall it feels very
solid. At 1:1 magnification, it looks small
and innocent, but when you focus
to 5:1, the lens becomes huge, it get even a
little longer than the big Canon 180mm
Macro. This is because it incorporates a
kind of extension tube, that allows to reach
such impressive magnifications.
There are few Canon lenses that don't
have autofocus, and the MP-E is one of
these. Even though it is called 1x-5x, it is
not a zoom, when you move the large rubber
ring you are not zooming, you are moving the
focus, to increase the magnification. Of
course there is not image stabilization, but
in this case is not a problem, the MP-E is
not a lens you will handheld often (unless
you are shooting with flash as main light).
Another peculiarity of the MP-E is that
you can easily get more magnification than
1:1, but you can not get less. In other
words, it is impossible to take a portrait
or a landscape photo with the MP-E, because
the widest area that it can frame is 24x36mm
(or 16x24mm if you are using an APS-C
camera). The majority of macro photographers
who own this lens have also a more versatile
macro as the 100mm or 180mm, that can be
used even for subjects larger than 24x36mm.
In front of the lens, you can easily mount a
ring flash or other kind of flashes: at the highest magnifications it is
almost impossible to take a sharp photo
without flash. Canon sell two flashes
thought for macro work: the Canon MR-14EX
TTL Macro Ring Lite Flash ($500) and the
Canon MT-24EX Macro Twin Lite Flash
($ 730). When you buy the MP-E, I highly
recommend to buy one of these flashes. |

Size
comparison: on the left you can see the Canon 180mm Macro L vs the Canon
MP-E at 1:1, while on the right there is the Canon 180mm vs the MP-E at 5:1.

Front elements
comparison: the 180mm (left) has a big front element, while the front
element of the MP-E is surprisingly small.
|
The MP-E in
the field : getting crazy with (no) depth of
field
The MP-E is a quite difficult lens in the
field. Forget the 24 centimeters
focusing distance: it its not "true" even at
1:1, because it is the distance from the
focus plane (sensor) to the subject, so the
real distance from the front of the lens to
the subject is about 11 centimeters. Add the
ring flash, and you are at about 8-9
centimeters from the subject. At the highest
magnification, the real distance is further
reduced to about 2 or 3 centimeters: by this
time, if the bug you are photographing has
not moved yet, it may be because it has dead
of terror ;-)
But the real problem is not
working distance: it is the depth of field,
that is almost inexistent. At the highest
magnifications, you have to work at f/4 or
f/5.6 to get a good sharpness (f/8 has
already a very strong diffraction, and f/11
or f/16 are unusable)...as you can imagine,
the depth of field is truly minimal at these
apertures, so it is impossible to get
everything in focus. You must do a selective
focus on the most important areas of the
subject, and it is not easy; otherwise you
can try to take various photos and to do
focus blending to extend the depth of field,
but it is not easy either, and sometimes it
is impossible. In some cases, the only way
to get the photo is to stop down to f/8 or
f/11 in spite of the diffraction; the detail
will be quite soft, but the alternative is
to get a photo where nearly everything is
out of focus, except a 3-4% of the frame.
Working in natural light is
not easy at 1:1 and 2:1, it is very
difficult at 3:1 and it is almost impossible
at 4:1 or 5:1, because at these
magnifications every minimal vibration
result in a blurred photo. Most of the times
the MP-E is used with flash: the flash
allows to eliminate both the blur created by
your movements and the subject movements.
Other than that, a tripod with gear head (as
Manfrotto 410) and focus rail are a big help
to focus and compose the photo: the MP-E is
different from the classic lenses. With
MP-E, you rotate the focus ring to choose
the magnification, then you focus by moving
closer or more distant to the subject.
Image quality
I have tested the lenses on my Canon
7D (18 megapixel, APS-C). The lenses
were mounted on tripod; I have used mirror
lock up and self timer. The following images
are 100% crop from the unprocessed RAW file.
Usually I include a comparison with one or
more similar lenses, but since there is not
any lens similar to the MP-E, here I have
focused the image quality test on the
quality of the MP-E at every magnification
and aperture.
Magnification 1:1 crops (the test photo
measured 22.3 x 14.9 mm; each 100% crop
shows an area of 2.1 x 1.6 millimeters)
|
|
 |
|
f/2.8 |
f/4 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/5.6 |
f/8 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/11 |
f/16 |
|
At 1:1, the image quality is good between
f/2.8 and f/8; f/11 is bit soft but still
usable, while I'd try to avoid f/16.
Magnification 2:1 crops (the test photo
measured 11.2 x 7.5 mm; each 100% crop shows
an area of 1.05 x 0.81 millimeters)
|
|
 |
|
f/2.8 |
f/4 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/5.6 |
f/8 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/11 |
f/16 |
|
At 2:1, the image quality is ok at f/2.8,
but it clearly gets better at f/4 and f/5.6.
You have good sharpness until f/8, while
f/11 is a bit too soft for my standard, and
f/16 is unusable.
Magnification 3:1 crops (the test photo
measured 7.4 x 4.9 mm; each 100% crop shows
an area of 0.70 x 0.54 millimeters)
|
|
 |
|
f/2.8 |
f/4 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/5.6 |
f/8 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/11 |
f/16 |
|
At 3:1, you have good image quality
between f/2.8 and f/5.6. I'd recommend to
use f/8 only if you really need it, and I'd
avoid f/11 or f/16.
Magnification 4:1 crops (the test photo
measured 5.57 x 3.72 mm; each 100% crop
shows an area of 0.52 x 0.40 millimeters)
|
|
 |
|
f/2.8 |
f/4 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/5.6 |
f/8 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/11 |
f/16 |
|
At 4:1, image quality is good at f/2.8
and f/4; I'd recommend to use f/5.6 only is
you really need it, and I'd recommend to
avoid f/8, f/11 and f/16.
Magnification 5:1 crops (the test photo
measured 4.46 x 2.98 mm; each 100% crop
shows an area of 0.42 x 0.32 millimeters)
|
|
 |
|
f/2.8 |
f/4 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/5.6 |
f/8 |
| |
|
|
 |
|
f/11 |
f/16 |
|
At 5:1, the maximum magnification, the
image quality is good only at f/2.8 and f/4.
f/5.6 is really at the limit; f/8 and
smaller apertures are unusable.
This test is done with the Canon 7D, that
adds 1.6x magnification to the already
stellar magnification of the Canon MP-E. If
you use a fullframe camera, you will get
less magnification, but you will be able to
stop down about 1 stop more without losing
image quality. For example, the image
quality of the MP-E at 5:1 and f/4 on 7D is
the same IQ of the MP-E at 5:1 and f/5.6 on
1DsIII. On the other hand, with the 7D you
have 1 stop more depth of field, so at the
end the results are about the same.
As already said, remember that sometimes
you will have to stop down beyond the
"recommended aperture", otherwise the depth
of field will be so thin than almost
everything will be out of focus: sometimes
you have to sacrifice detail for depth of
field.
Samples and comments
These are some sample
photos taken with the Canon 65mm f/2.8
MP-E on Canon 7D. You can download
either the untouched photo (JPEG
converted from RAW without any
additional post processing; minimum
contrast and saturation, no sharpening,
no AC, distortion or vignetting
correction) or the post processed
version. The untouched photo is a good
way to see the real image quality of the
lens, and the post processed versions
allow to see the final quality you can
get with good post processing
techniques.
The image quality is
good, if you don't stop down too much.
At 5:1 it is difficult to get truly
razor sharp images at 100%, in
particular on a APS-C camera, but
overall the image quality is ok for an
extreme lens like this. I'd say that it
is the best 5:1 macro lens of the world
and, by the way, it is also the only 5:1
macro of the world :-) All these samples
had been taken at f/5.6, that is the
smallest aperture you can use at the
highest magnifications without strong
diffraction.
Conclusions
The Canon MP-E is a great lens; there is
nothing to fault. It is difficult to use,
and the image quality is good only if you
don't stop down too much, but these are not
faults of the lens - they are the
unavoidable problems of working at very high
magnification. If you are an experienced
macro photographer, and you want a lens to
go beyond 1:1, I highly recommend the Canon
MP-E! It is an awesome tool and it has a
very reasonable price, even though you have
to add some hundreds of dollars for the
flash.
If you are looking for your first macro
lens, instead, forget about it. Without a
good experience with macro work, it is
difficult to get good results with this
lens...it is like a F1 car: if you are a
pilot you can go crazy fast, but if you are
used to drive a Fiat Panda, you would go
straight at the first turn.
Do you have
comments or questions?
If you have comments or questions about
this article, feel free to ask in the
Juza
Nature Photography Discussion Forum!
|
|