tips for super close macro?

Hi all, long time without posting.

I just spent a couple of days shooting with the latest Panasonic cameras, and was favorably impressed by their macro capabilities. I can put the lenses at 1cm from the subject and take marvelous, detailed pics.

I would LOVE to do that with my XT but I have give up shooting macro. This is why I'm asking you, the experts, to help me on this. I currently own the kit lenses and a Sigma 18-200. Sure, not the best glass out there, by far, but good enough for what they are.

What should I buy to get the BEST possible macro out there? Maybe an ultra mega expensive prime "L"? Maybe some low cost trick?

What do you use to get extremely detailed macro? I'm talking about drops of water in a leaf, small insects, incredible small details on rocks, that sort of stuff.

Thanks.

google "reverse macro" for a low budget macro

A lot of it really comes down to technique, but here are some gear suggestions if you have money to invest in gear:

Lens - 100mm f2.8 macro + tubes or a 500D close-up filter or the MP-E 65. The MP-E is an amazing lens that will shoot from 1x - 5x, but is MF only and requires a lot of skill to get good results. Definitely the best for super macro though.

Body - pretty much anything. The crop-sensor will give you the appearance of higher magnification at the same focal length. Live view can be used to good effect if you're shooting stationary objects in a studio setting.

Flash - I think the MT-24EX is the way to go. You'll want to diffuse the light, but there's a ton of threads on that topic on this site.

If you want to go low-cost, then just get a lens reversing adapter and experiment with different lenses - some people can get pretty amazing results and you only need to spend money on a $5 adapter ring and use whatever lenses you have on-hand.

What you should get depends on how seriously you are going to do macrophotography and how much you are willing to spend. For ultimate macro, both magnification and details, you should get MPE-65 & MT-24 macroflash. For lesser magnification, though as sharp as MPE, canon 60mm or 100mm macro will do. If you want to do occasional macro only, I would suggest that you get a set of Kenco extension tubes. With Sigma 18-200 you will get 1:1 magnification and more. IQ will be almost the same as the native lens as extension tubes contain no glass. After using the ETs if you feel you want do more serious macro work then only get a dedicated macro lens. You will need some sort of lighting - natural light is rarely adequate for macro shooting. A normal flashgun mounted on a bracket & fitted with a diffuser (Lumiquest, Sto-fen, etc) will be fine.

Take a look at the Weekly Macro/Close-up thread. Most of the posters give details of the equipments used. You can judge for yourself.

--
Gautam

A reversed 50mm (or whatever you have) is your best bet. Macro is the only area of equipment where you can get quality images for little $. There is little or no difference between a reversed 50mm at f/8 and a dedicated macro lens at f/8. You will have to stop down, so the fact that a macro lens is sharp wide open is often redundant.

If you want super close-ups and the best macro lens you can buy, then the MPE 65mm is the best and only option. However, be aware that it does not focus on infinity and that in can only be used in the range of life size to 5x life size. It also takes a fair bit of practice to use a lens at this magnification.

In the meantime, if you just want to have a go at some high magnification close-ups then a reversed lens (especially a wide-angle) will give you good quality for very little outlay.

Start with something manageable. The Canon 100mm gives you 1:1 true macro, and on a crop camera (like yours) is actually 1.6:1. This is a tough enough way to start.

A good flash is a must. In order to get super closeups, you must get very close to the subject. Then, you depth of field is almost zero... unless you shoot at F11 or higher, preferrably F16.... then, you need to flash the subject to have any hope of getting the picture.

A good starter setup is the 100mm macro, and the MT-24EX twin macro flash. For a little over $1000, you are in business and can get good shots. All the macros in my gallery are with this setup. I am not in the league of the top guys with MPE lenses, but i am just getting started and can grow into that. My shots will give you an idea of what you can reasonably expect as a beginner.
--
http://dogluver.smugmug.com

SteB said:

If you want super close-ups and the best macro lens you can buy, then
the MPE 65mm is the best and only option. However, be aware that it
does not focus on infinity and that in can only be used in the range
of life size to 5x life size. It also takes a fair bit of practice to
use a lens at this magnification.

In the meantime, if you just want to have a go at some high
magnification close-ups then a reversed lens (especially a
wide-angle) will give you good quality for very little outlay.

Click to expand...

I second all the above, but... there is a BUT to it

most certainly the very first step would be to wet your toes, and to
see whether rigors involved with shooting macros with DSLRs will give
you experiences and joys you expected; macro with DSLR is quite
much different level of difficulty than with P&Ses;

so, perhaps instead of jumping the boat, you should just use your Sig.
zoom, buy a reverse ring to match it, and some not too expensive manual
prime of f/1.4-f/2, and of as good resolution as you can find - the SMC
Takumars 50/1.4 or 35/2 would be my first choice, as they offer a good
compromise price wise, and are not difficult to find (but look for the SMC,
rather than Super Taks, as the latter are prone to yellow coloration);
actually any good MF prime will do,

there is a link of interest to see what it can give you (with Sigma 150 and a
reverse lens, but your zoom will serve OK at the beginning) if you'll muster
patience enough to learn all necessary arcana:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=28855803

good luck,
jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

Definitely the reversing ring is the cheapest and most effective way of producing high magnification images. You can produce very high quality results with quite reasonably priced lenses. If you do not have much experience with macro, especially high magnification macro I would strongly recommend you try something like this before you consider buying something like the MPE 65mm, even if you can easily afford it.

Another cheap alternative that gives very good results would be the Raynox DCR-250 close-up lens. The advantage being that it is easy to add on and remove. The main disadvantage being the shallower depth of field, and the fact that you need to use a longer focal length lens to get higher magnifications. Nevertheless, if you do not have much macro experience this is one of the easiest options to use and learn with.

If you do not have much experience with high magnification macros, then you definitely need to practice as learning the technique is far more important than having the best lens. Please do not worry if you don't get the results you want at first, as it is really something you need to learn from experience. Have a go, learn by your mistakes, and read advice how to solve these problems, then try and put what you read into practice. Many people get disillusioned because they find that high magnification macros are harder than they first thought, but even the best macro photographers struggled at first.

SteB said:

Another cheap alternative that gives very good results would be the
Raynox DCR-250 close-up lens. The advantage being that it is easy to
add on and remove. The main disadvantage being the shallower depth of
field, and the fact that you need to use a longer focal length lens
to get higher magnifications. Nevertheless, if you do not have much
macro experience this is one of the easiest options to use and learn
with.

Click to expand...

despite it's convenience, Raynox DCR-250 close-up lens offers much less
in a DSLR world, than it does for P&S or compacts - actually it might be
of some disappointment, esp. on shorter FL lenses, where it quite heavily
vignettes sometimes; also - and this is a bit surprising if one judges by a
dioptric "power" alone, say, in comparison with the 250D or 500D lenses -
a magnification it offers seems to be quite modest, at a cost of very
shallow DOF, and surprisingly short WD; clearly Raynox DCR-250 was
designed for rather different glass than most of DSLR's lenses on
market today - perhaps someone with much better understanding of
optics will chime in and explains it more "scientificaly", as the
DCR-250 seems to defy an old adage that a lens is just a lens,
is a lens!!? with compacts results of the DCR-250 are often amazing, or
stunning even,

jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

Its actually a lot better than you seem to think. I've got one but rarely use because I've got better and more versative means to get high magnification. I don't know if you are familiar with this actual lens. It is +8 diopters and not the +4 diopters of the 250D. It does need a longer focal length lens really, which is what I said. Vignetting does not seem to a problem unless its on quite a short lens, which is a bit pointless anyways. I've tried it on my Sigma 150mm and not only is the IQ very good, but there is no pereceptible vignetting and this is a lens with a 72mm filter thread (I just clipped it in to the MT24EX holder with a skylight filter on the lens). As I said I've got better means for high magnification and so have not used for serious photos, however I can dig out a few.

Here is a link to one on the recent weekly macro thread http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=28884495

However, I do have a whole pile of the higher magnification Raynox lenses up to +20 diopters, and they are amazingly good, better than most reversed 50mm standards (+25 dioptres) (stacked on a telephoto). I got them from Jessops here when they were closing many of their stores. They were in kits for now obsolete digicams (but they are the same as the newer ones they sell), for as low as £2.50 for a set of 2. I'll do a few photos with them on the Sigma 150mm sometime, I think people will be shocked at how good they can be.

SteB said:

Its actually a lot better than you seem to think. I've got one but
rarely use because I've got better and more versatile means to get
high magnification. I don't know if you are familiar with this actual
lens. It is +8 diopters and not the +4 diopters of the 250D. It does
need a longer focal length lens really, which is what I said.

Click to expand...

yes, I know, and sorry to mislead you earlier - I should mention that
I own dcr-250 for many years now; indeed it works best on longer FL,
perhaps best of all in my experience on 300+ mm lenses;

however, and in a big contrast of what dcr-250 was able to deliver for
many on their digicams (see e.g. http://www.treknature.com for very many
fantastic examples - all infused by some magic, internal light, which seems
to shine from within their subjects),
it was newer more than a curio item for me on DSLR, and I'm yet to see
any really WOW pics. from it on any DSLR )

SteB said:

However, I do have a whole pile of the higher magnification Raynox
lenses up to +20 diopters, and they are amazingly good, better than
most reversed 50mm standards (+25 dioptres) (stacked on a telephoto).
I got them from Jessops here when they were closing many of their
stores. They were in kits for now obsolete digicams (but they are the
same as the newer ones they sell), for as low as £2.50 for a set of
2. I'll do a few photos with them on the Sigma 150mm sometime, I
think people will be shocked at how good they can be.

Click to expand...

for such a huge drop in prices they are indeed a bargain, and yet... both 500D
(at +2), and the 55/1.2 (+25) reversed are yielding much more IQ-wise for
me, than dcr-250 (+8), which according to above should be somewhere in a
middle just by arithmetics )

jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

lx200 said:

Start with something manageable. The Canon 100mm gives you 1:1 true
macro, and on a crop camera (like yours) is actually 1.6:1.

Click to expand...

Is this really true? I thought that a macro lens on a 1.6x camera would still only give you 1:1 without tubes (but that you could achieve that 1:1 from 1.6x farther away from the subject than you would need on a FF camera). Is my assumption wrong?

Player9 said:

Is this really true? I thought that a macro lens on a 1.6x camera
would still only give you 1:1 without tubes (but that you could
achieve that 1:1 from 1.6x farther away from the subject than you
would need on a FF camera). Is my assumption wrong?

Click to expand...

reproduction ratio is always the same - 1:1, it doesn't depend on whether
the body is FF or 1.3, or 1.6 crop - on FF a 35mm long object will take
35mm on a sensor, and a 22 mm long subject will be exactly 22mm on
1.6 crop sensor, as well as on FF sensor;

this is very common misconception, often repeated,

jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

I understand you. I only got it ages ago for a Panasonic FZ20 I used to carry when I didn't want an SLR system with me. I've not used the DCR-250 much on a DSLR system. It does work pretty well with some lenses, but with others it is not so impressive. For instance on a Sigma 105mm macro it didn't seem to work so well (perhaps because of the recessed front element), although strangely the higher power Raynox close-up lenses did work very well with this lens. It seems to work okay on telephoto zooms, but as the only one I currently have is a Sigma 50-500mm, I haven't tried it on that for obvious reasons.

Overall, though, for someone who has a normal consumer telephoto zoom I think its quite a good cheap option to have a go at some macros.

Thanks for all the answers. The Raynox DCR-250 looks promising. A couple of questions, I guess the needed light is in relation to the lens used. I have a 18-200, the original 18-55 and plan to buy a 50 1.8 and a sigma 70-300 (which, btw, is labeled as macro). Can I use any of these with the DCR-250? will I need any special light?

And please remember that my experience is with a non DSLR Panasonic, which I just pointed to some drops of water on leaves getting amazing results. Nothing fancy, nothing complicated, camera in hand, using natural daylight.

If you don't use the reverse technique or extension tubes or closeup filter-attachments, I'd suggest the Canon 100mm macro. Don't know if macros are serious for you or something to play-around with. If the latter, I'd go the cheaper route.

If you want a "super close" macro, the MPE-65 is the best choice.

Kent

Bodhi Dharma Zen said:

And please remember that my experience is with a non DSLR Panasonic,
which I just pointed to some drops of water on leaves getting amazing
results. Nothing fancy, nothing complicated, camera in hand, using
natural daylight.

Click to expand...

Compact digital cameras with their very small sensors have one inherent advantage over DSLRs - much, much greater depth of field at short subject distances. Assuming your compact focuses close enough, and many of them can, you can just stick it a cm or two in front of the subject, use auto focus and auto exposure, and get a pretty impressive shot. Of course the image quality is rubbish, controlled lighting is impossible at distances of a few mm, and anything which can fly away, will.

With a DSLR you will spend much more money for a piece of kit which is much harder to use, and which has the disadvantage of needing to be stopped down so far that it can be difficult to get an adequate exposure at a usable shutter speed. So you spend even more money on a tripod, macro focusing rail, flash...

But the reward is a huge increase in image quality, and the ability to tackle subjects which require a greater working distance.

To answer your original question, I've used my EF-S 60 mm macro with extension tubes to get down to about 2.5:1. This is well into extreme macro territory and I've only dabbled in it so I don't have any shots to show you, but it certainly works very well.

The Raynox DCR-250 will work with all the lenses you have listed there. The longer the lens and the better close focus on it the closer you can get. You can alter the magnification a bit by zooming, but watch it at the wide angle end as you could get vignetting (corner shading). Also remember that with the DCR-250 attached, you will not be able to focus on anything further than 12.5cm from the end on of the lens

I've put a link to the Raynox DCR-250 on the Raynox website in case you don't know what it looks like or how it works. It will work with a lot more than the cameras listed here. http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/dcr/dcr250/indexdcr250eg.htm

If you plan on getting the Sigma 70-300mm, this will get you very close on its own, as the macro function on this is very good. With the Raynox on you will be able to get even closer.

At high magnification any camera movement will be greatly magnified so camera shake will be a problem. There are only really 2 options, that is either to use a tripod or use a flash for hand held pictures. Look for tutorials on macro photography on the internet, and they will explain techniques.

For a beginner, the explaination provides the detail they need.

On a crop camera, the final image will appear larger than on a full frame using the same lens. Effectively creating the same effect you would have as using extenions tubes on a full frame to get to 1.6:1.

Final picture from 1:1 crop camera = final picture from 1.6:1 full frame camera.

It reallly about conveying information to a newb, without making it a PhD thesis.

--
http://dogluver.smugmug.com