Macro Gear

Carl Thomas

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
289
Reaction score
0
Location
MT, US
I want to start doing some general macro work (little bugs, worms, seeds, just what ever) with my 20D. Right now my photography is general but mostly wild life and nature. I would like to stay with all Canon gear but I would use other gear.

So what kind of gear do I need to start doing macro?
 
The Canon 100mm f/2.8 lens is quite possibly the best bargain in macro out there. Its a great lens that doesn't require you to get right up ontop of the subject. Although not L glass Its pretty damn sharp. I use one for close up product shots and its quite good. The 180mm is even better (lets you back up farther.. so as to not scare the little critters) but costs a bit more, is only f/3.5 (doesn't matter much... you'll have good light for most shots.. and the criters dont move all that fast) and is L glass.. but you pay for it. I own both. I bought the 180 after the 100. If you aren't serious and don't need that extra 2%, orthe longer range, or its not production work the 100 is good enough.

The MPE-65mm is manual focus only, lets you focus to 5x, but its a specialty lens and you might want to stay away from it till you get really hooked on macro.

The 50mm f/2.5 is cheaper than the 100, but you can only focus to half of life size (unless you buy the converter) and at that point you might as well just buy the 100mm and be done with it... plus its quality is not as good as the 100mm imho. the only thing the 55 has going for it is price, and its very small. Not worth it imho.
 
The Canon 100mm f/2.8 lens is quite possibly the best bargain in
macro out there. Its a great lens that doesn't require you to get
right up ontop of the subject. Although not L glass Its pretty damn
sharp. I use one for close up product shots and its quite good. The
180mm is even better (lets you back up farther.. so as to not scare
the little critters) but costs a bit more, is only f/3.5 (doesn't
matter much... you'll have good light for most shots.. and the
criters dont move all that fast) and is L glass.. but you pay for
it. I own both. I bought the 180 after the 100. If you aren't
serious and don't need that extra 2%, orthe longer range, or its
not production work the 100 is good enough.
The Canon 100 macro isn't quite as nice of a bargain once you add the lens hood and the tripod ring. The Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro includes both these items. The cost of the Canon hood and tripod ring bring the 100 Macro price over $600. You can buy the Sigma 150 Macro for under $600. And, you get even more working distance (15" at 1:1 vs. 12" for the Canon).

IMO, you really need the tripod ring for macro work. It makes framing shots much easier. I also like having lens hoods for protection and improved image quality.
The MPE-65mm is manual focus only, lets you focus to 5x, but its a
specialty lens and you might want to stay away from it till you get
really hooked on macro.
On my wish list;-)

--
Cheers,

bg

'I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.'
  • Bjarne Stroustrup, inventor of the C++ programming language
Check out my gallery at http://beerguy.smugmug.com

(See profile for the gear collection)
 
What lenses do you already own? Easiest first step for many is to
get an ext. tube or 2 to use on existing lenses.
I have a EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Kenko ext. tube, 36, 20, and 12mm but I want to start using a Macro Lens.
 
I, too, am new at macro photography and have equipment problems. I'll be recieving a Canon 100 macro on Monday - June 4. Looking into websites and the B&H catalog, I see a lot of equipment that makes sense but don't really know how applicable they are. Some questions if I may...

1.) Slider -Velbon comes out with a really slick aparatus that allows precise movement of the camera on a tripod for $99.00. I've seen it at the store and it seems to be a quality piece of equip. How is it in reality?

http://www.adorama.com/VNSSM.html

2) Tripods - the feature that some have to allow horizontal mounting of the center column. To me it would be a thing to allow more flexibility in placing the camera closer to sneaky critters who choose not to model for you. Also, what other tripod extensions or adaptations are availble so I can look forward to spending more money pursuing my hobby.

3) Extension tubes - getting a set like the Kenko tubes in addition to having the 100 macro. I see a lot of examples of 100 macro pictures from flowers that could be done with any lens to pictures of bees that you could see the segments in the bee's eye and count the hairs on its back. I have to assume the photographer is using something besides the naked lens. example: Manfrotto 055MF4

4) Can anyone point me to a good reference book on digital macro that is up-to-date equipmentwise and shows setups and techniques? I bought one too hastily and it turned out to be more for film and the equipment was quite dated but the pictures were fantastic.
 
I want to start doing some general macro work (little bugs, worms,
seeds, just what ever) with my 20D. Right now my photography is
general but mostly wild life and nature. I would like to stay with
all Canon gear but I would use other gear.

So what kind of gear do I need to start doing macro?
I know this sounds like I am trying to dodge your question, but you really need to define what you mean by macro.

It is possible to do 1:1 with little bugs and seads, but unless you are talking about a limited selection of worms you may not be able to do 1:1 on worms. And "just what ever" is really a broad description.

IMHO it is much easier to select what you need if you have a clear idea of what you want to do with it.

To start off with a 20d means a 1.6 crop factor and some AF and AE limitations with TCs if your fstop goes to high.

The crop factor is important in determining working distance and the AF/AE stuff may not be all that important (since you will probably be shooting MF and ME) but what you see in the viewfinder may be dim with a very slow lens.

I like the Sigma 150/2.8 because it has a good working distance, is fast enough to use a TC, and price wise is good bang for the buck. For things like butterflys, wasps, dragonflies, and the like the working distance is really nice.

I also like the Sigma 50mm/2.8 (even with no HSM) but I use this for imaging small computer parts I fabricate. They are two very different lens that serve different purposes.

I use a Sigma EF500 Super flash with the 150 and a Samigon ring light with the 50. The flash provides more dramatic lighting for insects, while the ring light provides flatter light for inanimate objects. Again both have their uses, and they compliment each other instead of competing with each other.

In the field shooting bugs and the like I often take two or three of those foldup wire and fabric sun screens you put behind the windshied of your car. They serve as light reflectors, can provide a solid background instead of a distracting background, can serve as a wind break, and when velcroed together can also serve as a light box.

When the foot or so working distance the 150 (sometimes with a 1.4 TC) provides is too short I use some or all of the Kenko tubes on my 400/5.6 for a working distance of three feet or so. I often shoot this setup using a Wimberely Sidekick, especially for flying Dragonflies.

I also use a Canon 500D CU filter on my 70-200, sometimes with a 1.4 TC.

Quite frankly I could take 8X10s from all these lens combinations and put them on a stack on a table and feel confident no one could reliabily ID which image came from which lens, with or without a TC.

If you try and narrow which type of macro images you want to capture, and what lighting conditions you will be imaging under you may have a much easier time selecting your gear.

I would recomend a Sigma 150 or the Canon 180 macro and a good flash as the most versatile setup to start off with.
 
I, too, am new at macro photography and have equipment problems.
I'll be recieving a Canon 100 macro on Monday - June 4. Looking
into websites and the B&H catalog, I see a lot of equipment that
makes sense but don't really know how applicable they are. Some
questions if I may...

1.) Slider -Velbon comes out with a really slick aparatus that
allows precise movement of the camera on a tripod for $99.00. I've
seen it at the store and it seems to be a quality piece of equip.
How is it in reality?

http://www.adorama.com/VNSSM.html
These are called rails and they work great, as long as what you are trying to image does not move.

If you want to image bugs that move as you try and get closer to them rails may not help a lot.
2) Tripods - the feature that some have to allow horizontal
mounting of the center column. To me it would be a thing to allow
more flexibility in placing the camera closer to sneaky critters
who choose not to model for you. Also, what other tripod
extensions or adaptations are availble so I can look forward to
spending more money pursuing my hobby.
Check out this link for a starting place

http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/pod/index.html
3) Extension tubes - getting a set like the Kenko tubes in
addition to having the 100 macro. I see a lot of examples of 100
macro pictures from flowers that could be done with any lens to
pictures of bees that you could see the segments in the bee's eye
and count the hairs on its back. I have to assume the photographer
is using something besides the naked lens. example: Manfrotto
055MF4
It is quite possible to get insect eyeball detail with a Sigma 150 or Canon 180. (this is assuming that you need reasonable working distance and are imaging live insects).
4) Can anyone point me to a good reference book on digital macro
that is up-to-date equipmentwise and shows setups and techniques?
I bought one too hastily and it turned out to be more for film and
the equipment was quite dated but the pictures were fantastic.
Here is a good on link for starters

http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/tutorials/macro/index.html

As you may notice I am a big Really Right Stuff fan. Not only do they make great ball heads and plates, but they have great online tutorials that are realistic in what you need.

This tutorial recomends Shaws book, which is very good, but may be dated in some folks mind.

The problem is there is no up-to-date equiptment that will solve most problems folks have with macro shooting.

The key is defining what you want to do.

First off will you shoot using a tripod or not, and just as important will you use flash or not. Both of these questions will limit what and when you can shoot.

And you need to look at your general shooting style and see how it fits into a specific macro shooting style. Sometimes I have a 70-200/2.8 on a 1d2 and it is quite easy to just screw a Canon 500D on the front and get very acceptable macros. Other times I put a 1.4 TC and a 150 macro on a xti and have a very nice macro only setup with 1:1 capability and a good working distance. Both options are good, but for different things.
 
Hi,

As I stated in another tread, my Canon EF 100/2.8 (non-USM) may be my oldest lens (1989), but it's also the best lens I have ever owned - including a good copy of the 100-400L IS. My wote would definitly go to the new USM version (but I'll only get one when the old lens is totally dead). IF (=constant size) and FTM would be great. Personally I don't care for a tripod ring or a hood: I sometimes (very rarely) use a monopod (and it works fine attached to the body) and the hood would just get in the way for the macro flash, which IMO is much more important. 150mm or 180mm would be great - sometimes! A shorter lens is after all easier to handhold, and I sometimes (quite often) find myself in rather awkward positions when taking pictures of insects ;-)

That said, all the true macro lenses produced by Canon, Sigma, Tamron and Tokina are excellent. But for future compatability and the general build quality (such as IF), I would buy a Canon. And for my needs, a 100mm is perfect.

Thomas
 
This is a shot at almost 3x using 62mm of tubes and a 500D diopter on Canon's 100mm macro lens (manual mode F16, 1/200, ISO 200 with an MR-14EX ring flash set to a 4:1 ratio and -1/3 FEC):



Check out my Flickr gallery -all of the images there were taken with Conon's 100mm macro: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dalantech/

--
My Blog: http://nocroppingzone.blogspot.com/
My gallery: http://photos.dalantech.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dalantech/

Always minimal post processing and no cropping -unless you count the viewfinder... ;)
 
Everyone is talking lenses. That's good. But, don't forget lighting. Natural light can work, but if you want to get real close, flash becomes necessary.

In other words, you need flash(es), bracket(es) to put them on, and diffusers.

There are a lot of options for the way you can do things (both with the lens setups and the flashes or lack thereof).

Here is a shot I took the other day with a nonstandard setup. I wanted more than 1:1 magnification. I used a Canon 20D, Kenko 3xTC, Sigma 50mm macro, MT24-ex flash covered with omnibounce diffusers. (For those who are blinking their eyes, yes, I said a three power teleconverter.) The image is cropped from the sides to the aspect ratio of the screen.



--
Happy shooting,
Mark
http://www.mplonsky.com/photo

 
Oft overlooked, but I think essential for macro, is the geared head.

It allows for precise movements on three axes (plural of axis?) and the gears are inherently locked. They will never move unless you move them by turning a knob. There are no handles sticking out like other pan-tilt heads.

Unlike a ball head you do not lose the setting on one axis while you change another. These heads are good for architecture, food, and product photography as well.

I use the Bogen 410:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/109828-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_3275_3275_Mini_Geared_Head.html

If your subject is prone to movement that you need to follow, then a ball head might be better. But for stationary objects, I like this one the best.
--
Joe
 
Does anyone know if a CP causes problems in macro work?
 
In the original definition, the term "macro" meant images which started at 1:1 and went beyond that to 1:-1. Any image which was 1:1+ was termed "Close-up".

Definitions tend to change and now the term "macro" is most often applied to images of 1:1 or 1:1+. In fact, even most "true" macro lenses will not provide imagery of 1:-1. As mentioned above, the 50mm Canon will only provide 1:2 imagery without the use of an adapter.

Most "true" (as opposed to zoom lenses which include the term "macro" in their names but only provide imagery at 1:2; 1:3 or even 1:4) macro lenses will give you extremely sharp images. My 90mm Tamron f/2.8 macro is one of the sharpest lenses in my lineup and I have several "L" lenses.

I like the 90-100mm focal length because IMO, it gives you sufficient lens to subject distance for most imagery but, is not as heavy for hand-holding as the 150-180mm macro lenses.

Although I love my Tamron, if I were going to buy a new macro lens; I would probably purchase the 100mm f/2.8 Canon. That decision is based on the better resale value of the Canon lens over the Tamron.

On the other hand, the opposite is true! If I were considering a used lens. The lesser resale cost of the Tamron makes it (IMO) a better used value. As an examply, I bought a mint 90mm f/2.8 Tamron for about $125 (including shipping) on eBay. While this was a great deal, I have frequently seen Tamrons sell for considerably less than the 100mm Canon.

In addition to a macro lens, I would seriously consider a flash with a diffuser that could be used off camera with an articulating bracket. I use a Seiglite bracket which I got at a garage sale years ago. The Seiglite bracket is often available on eBay for under $25.



--

Retired Navy Master Chief Photographer's Mate. I was a Combat Cameraman, Motion Picture Director, and a Naval Aircrewman. I also had experience in reconaissance and intelligence photography. I have had considerable commercial photo experience in weddings and advertising photography. I am fully retired now although I dabble occasionally in dog portraiture. I presently use Canon DSLR cameras.
 
1.) Slider -Velbon comes out with a really slick aparatus that
allows precise movement of the camera on a tripod for $99.00. I've
seen it at the store and it seems to be a quality piece of equip.
How is it in reality?
Macro rails are very handy for obtaining accurate focusing, especially if you intend to go larger than 1x. I personally use the Adoroma focusing rail as it is bidirectional. I also have a 410 Manfrotto geared head - many of my images are taken at 5x mag or more with the MPE65 and the geared head with the bidirectional rail allows for the fine adjustments that are required.
2) Tripods - the feature that some have to allow horizontal
mounting of the center column. To me it would be a thing to allow
more flexibility in placing the camera closer to sneaky critters
who choose not to model for you. Also, what other tripod
extensions or adaptns are availble so I can look forward to
spending more money pursuing my hobby.
Consider the Benbo or the Uniloc tripods; these are the most flexible of all tripods as the legs & head can be placed in just about any position. These tripods however are a bit wobby and so mirror lock up should be used. The other tripod that looks good is the new Manfrotto 190XProB with the tiltable central column (this is tempting me - I love Manfrotto gear).
3) Extension tubes - getting a set like the Kenko tubes in
addition to having the 100 macro. I see a lot of examples of 100
macro pictures from flowers that could be done with any lens to
pictures of bees that you could see the segments in the bee's eye
and count the hairs on its back. I have to assume the photographer
is using something besides the naked lens. example: Manfrotto
055MF4
To get a doubling of magnifications with ETs, you will need an equal length to that of the focal length of the camera, i.e. for a 100mm macro lens, you need a 100mm of ETs to get 2x. This does become clumsy with long focal length lens. If you wish to acheive very high magnifaction you can add a TC, reverse a lens (have a look at the Novoflex web site for examples) or better still, use the MPE65, which gives up to 5x mag, 10x (with 65mm of ETs) and even 20x (2xTC with 65mm ETs).
4) Can anyone point me to a good reference book on digital macro
that is up-to-date equipmentwise and shows setups and techniques?
I bought one too hastily and it turned out to be more for film and
the equipment was quite dated but the pictures were fantastic.
John Shaw's "Close-ups in Nature" is excellent. The other great book for closeup techniques is "Macrophotgraphy Learning from a Master" by Gilles Martin & Ronan Loaec. This is an extraordinary book & covers the level of details some photographers go to take their images - certainly aimed at the advance macrophotographer.

Both of these books are based on film; you really do not need it updated for digital as the techniques for obtaining close ups are the same. Digital is just a hell of a lot easier then film.

Hope this helps

Kind regards
Stephen
 
Totally agree, I consider this was the most useful piece of macro gear I have ever purchased, along with the Adorama bidirectional rail.

Kind regards
Stephen
Oft overlooked, but I think essential for macro, is the geared head.

It allows for precise movements on three axes (plural of axis?) and
the gears are inherently locked. They will never move unless you
move them by turning a knob. There are no handles sticking out like
other pan-tilt heads.

Unlike a ball head you do not lose the setting on one axis while
you change another. These heads are good for architecture, food,
and product photography as well.

I use the Bogen 410:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/109828-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_3275_3275_Mini_Geared_Head.html

If your subject is prone to movement that you need to follow, then
a ball head might be better. But for stationary objects, I like
this one the best.
--
Joe
 
Mark, what happened to the MPE65? Any reason for using this, other than a bit of fun? Just curious.

Kind regards
Stephen
Here is a shot I took the other day with a nonstandard setup. I
wanted more than 1:1 magnification. I used a Canon 20D, Kenko
3xTC, Sigma 50mm macro, MT24-ex flash covered with omnibounce
diffusers. (For those who are blinking their eyes, yes, I said a
three power teleconverter.) The image is cropped from the sides to
the aspect ratio of the screen.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top