DSLRUsers.com

Hey guys.

I'm pretty keen on one day getting a macro lens, my tamron 70-300 with 1:2 macro is pretty ordinary. At the zoom length it needs it is very shaky, even when on a tripod.

What are the best marco lenses?

What are the difference between macro and micro lenses?

What is a better focal length for a macro lens, 60mm, 100mm or more?

What is a better brand, Sigma, Nikon or other?

Thanks,
Owen.

Hey? What was that sound?

Sounds like a can of worms being opened

Ok, I'm not going to touch the brand question... But each person here likes what they have so search for that...

As for the FL
Longer = Longer working distance = easier to use flash = more distance from things you would not like close to your lens = but can use in smaller spaces = bigger and heavier = more expensive

oh and longer= more need for a tripod

Thanks mate... checking birdies prices they're not as expensive as I thought they would be.

Owen, have a think what you are taking photos of, then purchase focal length accordingly. Everything Scott says is correct. Snakes I would get 200mm, diamond rings 60mm. Many here have 105mm (myself and Scott included) as a nice compromise. It seems everyone makes a decent macro, Tamron, Sigma and Nikon to name some.

Owen - if you can make it up to Birddog’s for a mini meet one saturday there are always lenses to try including macros - just a thought but well worth it.

Thanks guys.

I would only get that close to a snake if it were behind glass! Even then I'd be tentitive.

Thanks for the responses.

Thanks Chris... it would be great to come along. Hopefully one day I'll make it.

Hi Owen,

Do you have a good tripod and head to start with? If you find the lens shaky - i think it is due to the tripod that you are using. So you will get the same problem when you get a macro lens. Unless you are shooting in bright light, you need tripod to get the sharpness that you are looking for.

regards,

Arthur

No I don't, I have a cheap $100 tripod which I thought was good at the time I bought it, and it is reasonable, just not that solid. It does a good job with landscapes and other stuff though.

owen wrote:No I don't, I have a cheap $100 tripod which I thought was good at the time I bought it, and it is reasonable, just not that solid. It does a good job with landscapes and other stuff though.

In macro, due to high magnification, any tiny vibration would cause the picture to be soft. Investment in a solid tripod is as important as selecting the right lens. If you are new to macro, i would encourage you to practice more on your existing lens. Watch the shutter speed. Try to take macro with speeds that will minimise camera shake. Also wait for the right moment when the wind has stopped. You will find that your pictures will come out a lot better.

When you could get reasonable good macro pictures and you find that you like macro, then it is time to buy a dedicated macro lens. In the meantime take your time to research into "macro techniques". Soon, you will find that there are many ways to take macro even without macro lens. Also, you will find that a good flash can help you go the distance.

regards,

Arthur

Thanks mate.

I was outside this morning with the tripod taking a photo of a bug that had crawled up a flowering weed. The shutter speeds were quite high - higher than the focal length anyway, and the focus was pretty much right. However the bug just wasn't that sharp. I'll post an example when I get home with a crop at 100% to show what I'm talking about.

Thanks again,
Owen.

owen, I have the Tanmron 70-300 too, and had fun with the 1:2 macro. Arthurs comments are absolutely spot on about what you need to do to reduce the effects of camera shake. My el crappo tripod is also a source of disappointment, and I am planning to spend more money on getting something better.

A couple of moths ago, I got the Nikon f2.8 105mm micro (which I gather is just Nikon's way of saying macro) and I am very happy with it.

owen wrote:Thanks mate.

I was outside this morning with the tripod taking a photo of a bug that had crawled up a flowering weed. The shutter speeds were quite high - higher than the focal length anyway, and the focus was pretty much right. However the bug just wasn't that sharp. I'll post an example when I get home with a crop at 100% to show what I'm talking about.

Thanks again,
Owen.

Hi Owen,

do post some pictures along with the exif information. I suspect that the depth of field is too shallow - that's why you don't find it sharp. I do know that your lens is capable of producing excellent pictures.

Nikon 105 macro is an excellent macro lens. But once you are an accomplished macro photographer, you would want a longer macro such as Sigma 180, Tamron 180 or the Nikon 200 (the best IMO). Such longer macro lens allows you to select a small part of the background e.g. a nice green portion as the back drop of your picture. The nice creamy green makes your subject stands out.

regards,

Arthur

The Nikon 200 is a fine bit of glass but the price tag is a bit fine as well!

Yes,
Maxwells have it for $3,439 !

MHD wrote:The Nikon 200 is a fine bit of glass but the price tag is a bit fine as well!

Who want to be without it? I have one same as fozzie, how is about first prize for the challenge at Xmas

I'm beginning to feel a little inadequate with my Nikkor 60mm

As a matter of interest what would be the effects of using it with a coverter?

Oneputt wrote:I'm beginning to feel a little inadequate with my Nikkor 60mm

As a matter of interest what would be the effects of using it with a coverter?

What converter? can this lens use with a TC?

Which is more important? The most expensive lens or finely hone macro techniques? You can have the best lens and still not produce keepers if you not have the right techniques. But if you have good techniques, you still can produce excellent pictures with a good lens.

In fact, the longer macro lens require more skills and techniques than the shorter lens such as the 105 or 60. Not only you need to folk out more $ for the 200, you also need alot time and effort to master the lens.

regards,

Arthur

Arthur is spot on regarding technique, but the Nikon 200 is just a beautiful lens with fantastic boke. I think if they were free everyone could find a space for one in their bag

Oneputt wrote:I'm beginning to feel a little inadequate with my Nikkor 60mm

As a matter of interest what would be the effects of using it with a coverter?

Hi

Inadequate in what way? Nikkor 60mm is an excellent macro lens. The difficulty you may have is if you are after shy insects or dangerous ones like snakes. Due to short fousing distance, you have to be very close to your subjects.

Yes, you can teleconverters, closeup filters, reverse lens, bellows or extension tubes to get higher than life size magnification. But that does not make the focusing distance longer. In fact, in some case, it will get even shorter. But again, why would you need such high magnification? If you have a good answer to the question, then yes, a longer macro lens can help and you still can add all options e.g. teleconverter.

You can also achieve the same effect to a certain extent with zoom lens, telephoto lens or even a digicam.

For example:-
2.5X life-size magnification with the following:
Focusing distance is 4cm (subject to sensor).

I awsn't being serious about feeling inadequate. I love the little 60mm, but I was serious about the question

For your detailed explanation I thank you

Nice macros Arthur, very impressive

Glen wrote:Nice macros Arthur, very impressive

Hi Glen

Sorry, mate. the pictures were taken by a friend of mine. But I do hope that they are helpful to illustrate what is possible with practice and with the right techniques.

regards,

Arthur

Okay here is a pic I was trying to take this morning.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/ ... 2small.jpg

Obviously this has been resized for the web but here is a cropped version of the pic at 100% and saved in PS at JPEg compression 11.. at 12 the filesize was too large for the image host.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/ ... 02crop.jpg

This is the sharpest image that I got.

Shutter speed: 1/500th
Focal Length: 220mm
Aperture: f/5 (I know this lens isn't sharp wide open but I needed the light)

The shot was taken on a velbon cx560 tripod and using the 2 second self timer so that I wasn't thumping down on the shutter, causing the vibration.

There you have it guys, how can I improve the technique to get this kind of shot sharper? I feel like I'll get better shots using my 50mm 1.8 lens instead.

Thanks,
Owen.

Owen, most macro is taken at high apertures like f22 to get depth of field. Try that and stabilising your tripod lens in any way possible such as hanging weight from it, towel over the lens, etc. I would practice on stationary objects first to see if the changes are working. Let us know how it goes.

I think it takes a lot of patience and practice. I have fun with my Sigma 70-300 APO II on macro......although a Nikkor 105 would be great to play with (just hold on a moment while I dream a little..........)

Still, even the crappier lenses can still pull off some OK shots, when the circumstances suit:



Far from a knockout photo, but it's not too bad (is it ??)

....and yes, it was on a tripod. No way could I handhold 300mm(macro) @ 1/80sec.

Probably the only thing I'm finding I really don't like about this lens is the "extremely" short DOF...even at f22. Still, for $250 odd I can't complain too much....

Even with my 105/2.8 Nikkor (how did I EVER live without this lens!?!?!?!) I need to stop it down or the DOF is thin to non-existant...

and when I do I have one of two choices (and often only one)

Bombard my target with photons using my sb-80DX (wildlife moving things)
Or use a tripod

and sometimes both..

I'll be frank and say, you can NOT shoot very sharp images of insects/wildlife with a macro without a good source of artificail light

This picture is taken with D70 + 18-70 Kit lens + 1.4XTC. Aperture is f8. Handheld.

What aperture to use depends on the focal lenght. In the case above at 98mm (70*1.4), f8 is sufficient. As you zoomed to 300mm, you need a minimum of f16 - 22 to get sufficient depth of field.

As you start out in macro, follow these guidelines:-

1. Use tripod whenever possible. This allow you to use low shutter speed which makes your background colour nicer otherwise you get black colour.
2. Parallel the subject to the film pane. Due to very little depth of field you only hope to get the entire subject sharp is to parallel it to the film pane.
3. Read the 2 articles below and follow their advice.

http://www.naturephotosociety.org.sg/AS ... e=4/9/2004
http://www.naturephotosociety.org.sg/AS ... =1/29/2003

But because you are not photographing at life-size. With good handholding technique you can shoot at 1/90 or 1/125. When you handhold, use your legs for support, tight grip, push the camera against your face, lock your elbows, breath in, breath out about 75%, gently depress the shutter (top - down direction). Check the picture (zoom to max) using the LCD. If it is not tact sharp, try again.

Keep trying. Keep experimenting. You will get there.

regards,

Arthur

owen wrote:Okay here is a pic I was trying to take this morning.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/ ... 2small.jpg

Obviously this has been resized for the web but here is a cropped version of the pic at 100% and saved in PS at JPEg compression 11.. at 12 the filesize was too large for the image host.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v198/ ... 02crop.jpg

This is the sharpest image that I got.

Shutter speed: 1/500th
Focal Length: 220mm
Aperture: f/5 (I know this lens isn't sharp wide open but I needed the light)

The shot was taken on a velbon cx560 tripod and using the 2 second self timer so that I wasn't thumping down on the shutter, causing the vibration.

There you have it guys, how can I improve the technique to get this kind of shot sharper? I feel like I'll get better shots using my 50mm 1.8 lens instead.

Thanks,
Owen.

Dear Owen,

Excellent, you are using tripod and self timer to minimize camera shake and you did succeed. At 1/500, you don't need the tripod as your focal length is 220mm. With proper handholding, you can use 1/250 to 1/125 to get sharp pictures easily.

The problem is not of sharpness. You can overcome the problem by:-

1. Using a smaller aperture (f11 - f32). Try not use f32 if possible. Don't worry too much about shutter speed as you are using tripod as long as the speed is above 1/60.
2. Focus point. Your focus point should be on the insect's eyes.
3. Move closer to the insect/flower. Move a few cm and stop and do it again until you are about the minimum focusing distance that you lens can focus. You need more magnification of the insect or flower to help you achieve the desired point of focus.
4. You can always add a closeup filter (+4 or +6). Don't buy +8 or +10 as the higher they do, the more they degrade picture quality. This is a very cheap way to get more magnicafication (like a magnifying glass) for macro. Alternatively, you can buy an extension tube (also very cheap). An extension tube is a hollow connection between the camera body and lens. It allows you to move closer to the subject, thereby giving you more magnifcation. Extension Tube 25 is the way to go for starter.
5. Use flash. Buy SB-600. Use Manual mode, dial shutter speed to 1/500, use f11 - f 16 and the camera and flash will work out the desired amount of flash to output. This is a good way to practice handholding.

I would encourage you to learn macro by using whatever equipment you have, slowly build up your understanding and macro techniques. Using close up filter, extension tubes and teleconverter will enrich your understanding of macro. Then when you finally get a macro lens, you will realize how much you have benefited from the experience.

When you get your macro lens, you still can attach those stuff that you buy (close up filter, extension tubes and teleconverter) to the macro lens to get higher than life-size magnification.

Finally, enjoy and have fun.

regards,

Arthur

Oneputt wrote:I awsn't being serious about feeling inadequate. I love the little 60mm, but I was serious about the question

For your detailed explanation I thank you

Hi Oneputt,

No offense. I hope that my sharing would help those starting out in macro. I don't wish for them to go thru what I went thru - spending alot of our hard earn money on changing equipment thinking that will solve the problem - when most of the time, the problem lies with our skill, technique and understanding.

regards,

Arthur

Arthur it is almost impossible to offend me and you certainly didn't. Your post was very enlightening.

Thanks for all your comments guys. I'll definitely have another go hopefully tomorrow morning when there are some more bugs with wet wings I'll use a larger aperture and see how they turn out.

I'm constantly learning and I really appreciate all your help.

Kind regards,
Owen.