Jens Bladt wrote:
"The term "macro" is used very loosely and tends to mean any photographic
situation where you get close to the subject.
Real macro photography is where you are working around 1:1 ratio and closer
thereby giving an image on film that is equal in size or larger than the
subject being photographed. The range from life size on film (1:1) up to ten
times enlargement on film (10:1) is be the strict definition of macro
photography. The range from 1:10 (1/10 life size on film) to 1:1 on film
should properly be called "close-up" photography.
Most lenses don't get very close at all so that close-up you tried of that
nice flower or interesting bug often turns out disappointing. Zoom lenses
usually have a "macro" setting where they may get close enough to give maybe
1:4 ratio (image on film is 1/4 the size of the subject). Any normal 4"x6"
print made from that negative will yield a picture of the subject about life
size due to the approximately 4x enlargement needed to make the print. But
if it was a small flower/bug it still will be a small flower/bug on the
print"
However, this doesn't stop lens manufacturers marketing their lenses to
their liking :-)
Regards
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
Its all relative. Medium format lenses are just as "flexible" in their
terminology. I picked up the 67 135mm "macro" that does 1:3. It is still
pretty close focusing compared to other 67 lenses (the 100mm macro
excepted). I think it will be a sexy performer.
OK, I've had enough wine for tonight.
D
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc
