Macro Shooting

Progen

I've noticed with my Sigma 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 Macro I'm struggling good macros (IE not a hope of getting a close up of a insect) it can't focus, even on manual its distort.

I can however focus on little bit bigger subjects like a pen lid or a peice of long grass/leaf.

Is there an adaptor out there for the lens to help magnify the subject while not loosing my focus?

I really like the lens, even with it benig only f3.5-6.3 it does the trick for what I'm using it for at the minute.

Anyone have any ideas?

eas

HI Progen

Unfortunately your dealing with the nature of macro photograhpy there - razor thin DOF is one of the challanges.

I would recomend a tripod for sure.....and maybe try using smaller aperture to increase DOF, beware of slow shutter speeds there tho.

I'm not sure if that sigma is a true macro lens......is it?

Progen

eas wrote:

HI Progen

Unfortunately your dealing with the nature of macro photograhpy there - razor thin DOF is one of the challanges.

I would recomend a tripod for sure.....and maybe try using smaller aperture to increase DOF, beware of slow shutter speeds there tho.

I'm not sure if that sigma is a true macro lens......is it?

Yeah, it's a macro.
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3305&navigator=2

Macro photography with a 1:3 ratio

The 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 DG MACRO lens has a minimum focusing distance of 50cm at all focal lengths and is equipped with a macro mechanism for close-up photography at 300mm telephoto, allowing a reproduction ratio of 1:3.

Heres 2 samples, handheld, up close, couldn't get any closer else it would loose focus:

exif flower: 28mm, f4, 1/60, iso 100 <- with canon 18-55
exif grass: 300mm, f5.6, 1/50, iso 200 <- with sigma 28-300

Benster

Progen, you could try a close-up filter over the lens. They're basically single glass elements you slot in front using a system like Cokin. I got a cheap one a few years ago in Jessops. They wouldn't be the best at cutting distortion or preserving the amount of light getting though, but they did come in handy for some shots.

I'd recommend using a tripod as much as possible for macro work. Also, about your shots above, they don't really look like macro shots as I would use the term (but that could just be me). Could you post a shot or two where you've pushed the lens to it's limit as far as a close-up is concerned?

I remember I took some experimental shots of a few coins ages ago. At the closest point I could focus to, the DOF was about 1-2mm, the topmost coin was in focus but the one underneath was blurred. That's the sort of DOF problem you're faced with and if stopping down the aperture, you will definitely need a tripod.

Hope that helps,

B.

eas

Macro photography with a 1:3 ratio

The 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 DG MACRO lens has a minimum focusing distance of 50cm at all focal lengths and is equipped with a macro mechanism for close-up photography at 300mm telephoto, allowing a reproduction ratio of 1:3.

I hate to be the one to tell you this - it's not a "real" macro lens - by definition macro photography is 1:1 rep. ratio minimum. I'm not sure how they get away with even using the term Macro - but sure what do marketing departments care about accuracy.

this explains why you can't get close ups in focus.....just beyond the capabilities of the lens.....

Progen

Good info!

I know there not 'true' macro shots, more close up that anything else, I'll take a shot of a coin and throw it up..

Progen

Progen wrote:

Good info!

I know there not 'true' macro shots, more close up that anything else, I'll take a shot of a coin and throw it up..

Well, after failing numerous times to get a sucesfull macro of a coin, it aint happening... i can only get the camera about a ruler away from the coin itself before distortion comes into play and the camera wonders to itself whats happening:D

So, think it's time I bought a decent dedicated macro/close up lens..

Any recommendations lads?

eas

I'd always recommend the main manufacture (Nikon, Canon etc.) if you have the budget. Having said that, I have a Sigma 105 EX DG - very good, some minor concerns, but good value/quality for the price - around €350- €400 online, 500'ish + in shops

some samples of mine from that lens

Blake

I'd suggest a set of extension tubes. They fit between your lens and camera body and I think will do exactly what you want.

Have a look on ebay and you'll probably get yourself a bargain

halenger

eas wrote:

I'd always recommend the main manufacture (Nikon, Canon etc.) if you have the budget. Having said that, I have a Sigma 105 EX DG - very good, some minor concerns, but good value/quality for the price - around €350- €400 online, 500'ish + in shops

some samples of mine from that lens

I do believe I hate you, completely. But you've made a macro (hopefully the Nikkor 105mm VR f/2.8G IF-ED - the new one) move pretty high up my list (to the top probably). Now I just need to sort my (planned) trip to America.

eas

halenger wrote:

I do believe I hate you, completely. But you've made a macro (hopefully the Nikkor 105mm VR f/2.8G IF-ED - the new one) move pretty high up my list (to the top probably). Now I just need to sort my (planned) trip to America.

that sounds like a serious blow to the pocket book, would love it!

you can also get good results from reversing your lens onto your camera. I've seen people literally duct tape their 50mm reversed on their SLR's and get almost perfect macros at close to 1:1. Search google and you'll find loads of info. I wouldn't recommend the duct tape, but you can get adaptor rings on ebay for most makes.

halenger

Actually you're right on that. I've seen it before but I never looked into it all that much. ... It is an expensive lens. I'll see how money is when I'm over there. I'd like to get a decent lens while I'm there - save some money etc.

eas

nothing compares to the real thing tho - if you want to shoot macro, you would be best of with a macro lens......than reverse that!

Shrimp

OP: go easy on the tacky frames you're putting around you're work. make them simpler.

Progen

Tacky? they ARE simple, just a drop shadow and a black frame... Because more or less thats how they would usually look when framed on the wall.. another example:

Thirdfox

I liked the frames... each to their own I suppose. Although plain frames would be nice too.

Shrimp

I'm telling you they look so amature and busy.. make the photos look bad..

Progen

Shrimp wrote:

I'm telling you they look so amature and busy.. make the photos look bad..

Ok.... what would you suggest so, if black frames aint your thing?

...and just to note, this is one of yours, with more or less the same looking border:

http://ic1.deviantart.com/fs8/i/2005/310/e/3/Lough_Talt_by_Shrimp123.jpg - Do you not like that either?

Shrimp

no, not the black frame.. I mean the drop shadow, too much white, and it seems like a bevel too ... very different to mine.

440Hz

eas wrote:

some samples of mine from that lens

STUNNING shots eas, I love the first one! Any more of these online somewhere? You have a site/flickr/etc?

eas

Thanks 440hz, appreciate the appreciation...:)

I havent really set myself up with a gallery or anything, guess I'm not really that arsed in sharing my work with the masses for the most part.

Having said that - here are some of a different style from a project I was working on recently - again, taken with the Sigma 105 macro.

beans

A macro lens is also quite high on my list of future purchases. I love the world of the small

Those clip shots are fabulous!

Blake

I mostly shoot with medium & large format cameras but I keep a 300D in my kit bag and have a set of extension tubes that I use with the standard 18-55 lens.

Whilst the attached photos aren't great they do show what can be achieved with a pretty modest investment - you can probably get a set of extension tubes for under 50 euro.

The coin was shot using a tripod and was illuminated by a desk lamp, the flower was shot hand held under natural light.