Macro Shenanigans

Dundhoone

I want to venture into the world of macro pics.....I asked Elven before about her equipment (extension tubes + 50mm lens) but I'd like opinions of that vs say a decent 100mm dedicated macro lens, say either the sigma or tokina....or anything else anyones got!!! (ahem rymus, how are you going with that new 150mm sigma??? photos look good!)

Price of me buying a set of kenko tubes is about 170 plus the 50mm prime (130) so its close enough to the tokina ATX 2.8 100mm at 375.

The macro lens by itself will give me 1:1 magnification......i'm still a bit confused about the math behind adding the extension tubes . They seem to give greater than 1:1 though. I wonder what i'd get if i combined the tokina with extension tubes ? I might be getting into the personal space of a lot of very small angry invertebrates

Fajitas!

Sigma 105mm macro 2.8 EX is a lovely lovely lens...

Dundhoone

That it is. Reviews I've read dont put much between it and the tokina though.

I'd be tempted to spend the extra few quid and get the sigma 150mm, I'd like to get pics of stuff that would be frightened by having a lens shoved at them.
From what I can figure so far, the extension tubes might give me >1:1 magnification but with only a very small working distance between lens and subject.

rymus

getting on very well with the 150mm; heres a few I got over the weekend







Bit slow to focus, but thats to be expected. It's rapidly becoming my weekend walkies lens of choice

Dundhoone

Very nice! DOF in the first one is spot on.
Did you crop these by much?

rymus

first one is about a 25% crop, other two arent cropped.

evilhomer

color looks excellent in those photos Rymus, any/much post processing?

rymus

naw not really... bit of sharpening, small bit of contrast. The colour straight out of the camera with that lens tends to be great thankfully.

440Hz

Gotta add that I liked the 150mm a lot, tis what i think id go for when i can afford another lens. Bit heavy but very nice results The again tis only heavy cos of my bionic arm and fact that im a weak little girlie :P

Valentia

Great shots Rymus. Our dear departed jools had some pics up on PI taken with his new 150 and the depth to the colours is amazing. The colours on yours are very much to my liking too

Jazus where am I going to get all the dosh from!! Where did you buy yours Rymus and how much??

Morlar

Those are great shots. Especially the first one, great technically and also interesting to look at.

rymus

Valentia wrote:

Where did you buy yours Rymus and how much??

I got mine from Kea Photo for in & around €500 incl 3 day delivery.

440Hz

Ahhhhhhh please give a spider warning!! Im sure the shots are very nice but i was too terrified to look

Valentia

rymus wrote:

I got mine from Kea Photo for in & around €500 incl 3 day delivery.

Was that a while ago? I see TechnikDirekt have it for €379. Sounds too tempting to resist.

440Hz

Valentia wrote:

Was that a while ago? I see TechnikDirekt have it for €379. Sounds too tempting to resist.

Hmmm wow... could be tempted for that myself.

Valentia

It gets better. Kea are doing it now for €287 + postage

Rymus, I have got a fair bit from HK and it has always been stopped in customs. Not much duty so not a real problem. Has your stuff been stopped?

rymus

Jaysus.. a few months ago at this stage. €379 is a very good price for it indeedy


€287? http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sigma-150mm-f-2-8-EX-DG-High-Perf-Macro-Lens-NEW-3U_W0QQitemZ200026187034QQihZ010QQcategoryZ4687QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem
Says £304 sterling there...

The 105mm is cheaper, p'raps wires are crossed?

Nothing I've ever bought has been stopped in customs and I've got a fair amount of stuff off them at this stage.

eas

I can vouch for the sigma 105. I''ve bee impressed with it from the start....but am know thinking of maybe replacing it with the Nikon 105 VR..:o

One critisism of the sigma is that it's not a great focuser, hunts around a good bit befor locking on. I almost always use manual focus with it. I do know that sigma have recently anounced an IF macro lens, seem to remember it being in the 60mm range maybe....

some mixed samples from the sigma :

very little crop if any on these

Valentia

Very very impressive eas. At its present price it seems like great value. I wouldn't worry too much about the focus as I'd prefer to focus manually at the macro setting.

Valentia

Rymus, is this the same lens?? : http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sigma-105mm-105-f-2-8-f2-8-EX-DG-Macro-Lens-NEW-4T_W0QQitemZ200023957048QQihZ010QQcategoryZ4687QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem

OOPS. Silly me!! It's a 105 not 150. The 'ol dyslexia is kicking in!!

440Hz

wow eas!! fantastic shots!! absolutely wonderful

ciaranhickey

Valentia wrote:

I have got a fair bit from HK and it has always been stopped in customs....

Hi Valentia,
Kea Photo will always mark package as "used item" or "replacement parts" and
they mark down the value so the item won't be stopped. I've ordered three
lenses from KEA and none have been stopped.

Regards,
Ciarán

Valentia

Thanks Ciarán.

eas

I'm sure you've considered the differnce that focal lenghts makes on the ability to take hand held shots, but just figured I'd throw it in as something else to remember when choosing a macro lens. Sometimes we can overlook the tradeoffs.

Valentia

Very good point eas. I have a Sigma 70-300mm which does 1:2 macro only at the 300mm setting and it is a pain trying to do handheld macro shots..

311

How do tubes compare to a dedicated macro ?
I use the tubes now and again ,but I always thought the macro glass was thicker and more dense than the standard lenses making them better at getting right into the object. Is this baloney or what ?

Dundhoone

eas wrote:

I'm sure you've considered the differnce that focal lenghts makes on the ability to take hand held shots, but just figured I'd throw it in as something else to remember when choosing a macro lens. Sometimes we can overlook the tradeoffs.

I dont follow? prime lens which does F2.8 should allow a fast enough shutter speed to handhold in daylight.....wouldnt it?
Are you only talking about using a zoom lens as a macro?

@ brian, as far as i've determined, tubes & a sharp prime can give you greater than 1:1 magnification , but you need a slower shutter speed / tripod as the tubes darken stuff up. You'll also need to get the lens much closer to the subject. Macro lens = faster therefore you can use it with faster shutter speeds and keep farther away from the subject.

311

Dundhoone wrote:

I dont follow? prime lens which does F2.8 should allow a fast enough shutter speed to handhold in daylight.....wouldnt it?
Are you only talking about using a zoom lens as a macro?

@ brian, as far as i've determined, tubes & a sharp prime can give you greater than 1:1 magnification , but you need a slower shutter speed / tripod as the tubes darken stuff up. You'll also need to get the lens much closer to the subject. Macro lens = faster therefore you can use it with faster shutter speeds and keep farther away from the subject.

I know the workwise differences ,but the detail in the results ??
You still need a dedicated macro flash with a macro lens ,the depth of field is so small that you need the speed of light ( I think thats the theory??)

Dundhoone

_Brian_ wrote:

I know the workwise differences ,but the detail in the results ??
You still need a dedicated macro flash with a macro lens ,the depth of field is so small that you need the speed of light ( I think thats the theory??)

um you've got me there. DOF should have nothing to do with needing a flash, AFAIK. Keeping the camera still at a slow shutter speed while focused right in is why you'd buy a flash, and getting a dedicated macro flash is like a mini set of studio lights for mini subjects!!

311

Cool ,I was convinced because the macro has such a small focus area ,the more light the sharper the subject.
I'm only at the camera larky 12 months ,excuse the lack of knowledge

Dundhoone

_Brian_ wrote:

Cool ,I was convinced because the macro has such a small focus area ,the more light the sharper the subject.
I'm only at the camera larky 12 months ,excuse the lack of knowledge

Woh there. I got my camera around march..... I'm even more camera nooby than you!!!:D
I've been trying to do my homework on macro lenses though......I'm wide open to correction!!

eas

Dundhoone wrote:

I don't follow? prime lens which does F2.8 should allow a fast enough shutter speed to handhold in daylight.....wouldnt it?
Are you only talking about using a zoom lens as a macro?.

In general longer focal length lenses need faster shutter speeds to get sharp images. The optic magnification exaggerates camera shake.

So, a 2.8 wide or normal lens would pretty much guarantee hand held speeds, but not necessarily in longer lenses. The rule of thumb I go by is your shutter speed should at least equal the focal length to ensure no camera shake.

As example if your shooting with a 60mm a shutter speed of 1/60 should guarantee no camera shake, 200mm min shutter should be 1/200, a 300mm min shutter should be 1/300 and so on.

So this FL problem coupled with the extreme magnification and generally lower lighting of macro photography requires higher shutter speeds again. In this case I try and use a min. shutter speed twice that of the FL.

Of course for macro, flash helps minimize the FL issue.

That may be confusing, I'm not the best at expaining these things. Maybe someone else could eleborate.

311

You've great shots eas ,have you ever used tubes ?

eas

_Brian_ wrote:

You've great shots eas ,have you ever used tubes ?

hi Brian

no experiance wiht tubes no.

thanks for the comments on the shots, but to be honest they're pretty bad compared with people who really know wha they're at (example below)

http://www.mdsign.nl/fotos/D70/

Valentia

Feck eas. T'would nearly make a person throw away the camera. Those shots are something else. Gives us something to aim for I suppose

Dundhoone

Ahhh I get you now.

I'll be having a go at making some sort of hood for my flash - im not investing in one of those roundy flashes unless I have too. I dont get enough use out of my flash as it is, I havent figured out how to use it well enough to avoid the pics looking , well, flashed!

Yeah they are awesome pics eas (yours and the link you posted), I'd be very happy if i could get results like that!

311

Nice website eas ,that guys macro shots are cool.
I suppose like all other photography ,in time you get your own style.

Dundhoone

Right Tokina 100mm ordered from Komplett. woo hoo!


Thanks for all the comments/advice!!!

311

Let us know how the lens is dundhoone ,I'm tempted to get one for myself
The tubes are handy to have ,but they are very slow.

Zillah

I bought a macro converter set when I was in New York. Total of x7, combined with 100mm should give some decent detail. Gets to 1:1 I think, although its hard to tell*. Whack the res up to max and then crop, the image should be nice and close.

Havn't had a chance to play around with it much yet, so far all I've done is shoot some quarters in the hotel lobby waiting for a taxi


*Is there a formula for that? The lens itself is 28mm-100mm, the three converter lenses are 62mm, x1, x2 and x4 for a total of x7.

EDIT:

There was also a gorgeous Nikkor lens there. 1.8 aperture, 50mm with lovely heavy construction. Bit out of my budget though.

mloc

i have the nikon 105mm VR macro on order... can't wait to get it to play around with. Anyone use one at all?

Fajitas!

Nope, but heard some very good reviews! Why other macro lenses don't have image stabilising features I don't know.

bovril

silly question but I have no experience of macro photography. With a 105mm macro lens, how close do you have to get to the subject (the horrible spider/ horrible insect) for to take similar photos to those posted on the thread?

Dundhoone

im expecting to have to be about 15cm away to get a real close up shot.
Going to be hard not to scare away insects.

Zillah

bovril wrote:

silly question but I have no experience of macro photography. With a 105mm macro lens, how close do you have to get to the subject (the horrible spider/ horrible insect) for to take similar photos to those posted on the thread?

Closer than a foot. My 100mm with macro converters has a minimum focusing distance of about four or five inches. You don't have to go for insects.

Borderfox

Nikon Vr macro is reviewed in Outdoor Photography this month. They seemed to like it.

Zillah

Here's some of my recent macro shenanigans if anyone has any comments

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/39819117/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/39818785/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/39817818/