Macro lenses

Hi all,

I am new to this forum and have a question on macro lenses. Actually, I recently purchased a Tokina 100mm macro lens. I am not happy with it as it doesn't get as close I would like. You know, to see the eyes of a bug.

Am i better off buying an extension tube or close up filters?
Your advice is appreciated. Thank you.

charlotte wilson

I'll try to explain from what I know. This lens has a maximum reproduction ratio of 1:1. This means that in its maximum magnification, it projects the subject 'as is' onto the sensor, i.e. in its real-life size. At 1:1, you should be able to fill the frame's width with something that's 23 mm wide. To achieve 1:1, the subject should be something like 20 cm away from the lens' frontal element (30 cm minimum focal distance minus the lens' own length). So to photograph a bug and see its eyes, you should almost stick the lens into the bug, which will probably cause it to fly away.

You may want to get a bit closer to the subject to see if the magnification is good enough with the bare lens.

A Canon 500D closeup lens is +2 diopter) and results in a reproduction ratio of 1.2x (vs 1.0x for the bare lens). The lens will AF with the closeup lens attached and you will not lose any light

A Marumi 330 +3 closeup filter (+3 diopter) results in a reproduction ratio of 1.3x. The lens will AF with the closeup lens attached and you will not lose any light

If you get a Kenko Extension Tube set, you get three tubes - 12mm, 20mm, and 36mm.

Using the 12mm tube results in a magnification of 1.12x and you lose about a 1/2 stop of light. AF should still work.

Using the 20mm tube results in a magnification fo 1.2x and you lose about a stop of light (maybe a slight bit less than a stop). AF should still work.

Using the 36mm tube results in a magnification of 1.36x and you lose a stop and a half of light. AF should still work.

It is a close call. The closeup filters screw on the end of the lens, so it is easy enough to remove one if you want to get back to the bare lens. The tubes sit between the lens and the camera so you must remove the lens from the camera to use a tube or to get the lens back to normal. Tubes can be stacked together (you could use the 12, 20 and 36 together for a 68mm tube for 1.68x magnification).

Whichever way to go, please be advised that as you get to magnifications above 1.00x, that you are going to need steady support such as a tripod. Many folks need a focusing rail too as the depth of field gets thinner and thinner as you raise magnification.

--
Catallaxy

I have a Sigma 105mm Macro for 1:1 shots (nice for portraits and tons of other stuff, too!). To get closer/bigger, I bought a used Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 (a great all-around lens, also), and a Nikon BR-2A reversing ring. It gives me about 3:1 reproduction ratio, but it's a HARD technique to master. You have VERY little DOF, and because you'll be stopped down to f/16-f/22 quite often, very little light comes through the viewfinder (not enough to see if you're in focus, you focus only by moving your body). Thus, you have to hold the aperture arm open with a spare finger until RIGHT before you take the shot, and HOLD STILL at the same time (hand-held)!

Here's some samples (ignore the focal length in the EXIF). The bug's antennae were ALMOST touching the lens, and the bug is only about an inch or less long:

I use Kenko tubes and a Kenko 1.4 TC on a Tamron 90mm macro lens to magnifications of about 3:1. The TC gives you a bit more working distance and the 1.4X does not affect the IQ and cut downlight as much as a 2X.

Before you try to go for these magnifications I would recommend you master shooting and manual focusing at 1:1 magnification with just the lens. You should also use diffused flash to get sufficient light and DOF at small (f/10-f/18 typically) apertures.

This is a springtail about 1mm in length, almost invisible to the naked eye, at 3:1 with 68mm tubes and 1.4TC.



This was with 48mm tubes and the 1.4TC at about 2.5:1



Lots more here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/95274920@N00/collections/72157627493688843/

--
Mike

http://www.flickr.com/photos/95274920@N00/

I have owned a Minolta 100mm macro lens, a Sigma 70mm macro, and currently own an 85mm Micro Nikkor lens and have been disappointed with all of them. I have come to the conclusion that if you really want to do macro photography than use a camera with a smaller sensor than APS-C . You will get sharper results with a much greater depth of field at much less expense. Some of the best macro shots of bugs I have ever seen have been posted on the DPreview small sensor camera forums. One poster in particular posted some superb macro photos of insects he shot with a FujiFilm s6000FD and a Canon close-up lens attached. I find I get better looking macro shots with my Fujifilm F31fd pocket camera than I do with my D7000 and 85mm Niikkor macro lens.

• Jon

Charlotte

Instead of using pattern metering, have you tried using spot or center metering? I've never had luck otherwise except for manual focus which is indeed a viable second option. The samples you posted are nicely framed, great color, could use a hint of sharpening and it looks like you focus is just missing the target a bit.

I agree that you want the bug's eyes to be razor sharp or the photo just isn't satisfying.

Nice.
And very sharp.
What a great lens.

jomike said:

I use Kenko tubes and a Kenko 1.4 TC on a Tamron 90mm macro lens to magnifications of about 3:1. The TC gives you a bit more working distance and the 1.4X does not affect the IQ and cut downlight as much as a 2X.

Before you try to go for these magnifications I would recommend you master shooting and manual focusing at 1:1 magnification with just the lens. You should also use diffused flash to get sufficient light and DOF at small (f/10-f/18 typically) apertures.

This is a springtail about 1mm in length, almost invisible to the naked eye, at 3:1 with 68mm tubes and 1.4TC.



This was with 48mm tubes and the 1.4TC at about 2.5:1



Lots more here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/95274920@N00/collections/72157627493688843/

--
Mike

http://www.flickr.com/photos/95274920@N00/

Click to expand...

--
Look at the bright side... Whitney Houston is 5 months sober !

Seems like a lot of the response here is overlooking the obvious: the Tokina 100mm macro should be able to provide the results Charlotte is looking for. Other than the tiniest of insects you should certainly get in close on most insects and get good, sharp focus and detail of the eyes. You'll need to push in with full 1:1 extension of the lens, which it doesn't look like you've used in any of your sample photos.

ersouza said:

Seems like a lot of the response here is overlooking the obvious: the Tokina 100mm macro should be able to provide the results Charlotte is looking for. Other than the tiniest of insects you should certainly get in close on most insects and get good, sharp focus and detail of the eyes. You'll need to push in with full 1:1 extension of the lens, which it doesn't look like you've used in any of your sample photos.

Click to expand...

Good point. I'm guessing the OP is using AF, instead of racking it out to 1:1 and focusing by moving her body.

I'm not at home, so I can't upload a photo to my gallery to add, so I'm putting in the link. This was taken with my D7000, hand-held with the Nikon 105mm macro lens:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/velvetmermaid/7707800664/

I want like the first one, but DOF is just too narrow for my tastes.

Just found this moth on my kitchen window.





--
Maybe the Hokey Cokey is really what it's all about

"







D7000
Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G ED IF AF-S VR
Nikon AF-S VR 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF-S DX 35mm f1.8
Nikon R715 (AF-S DX 18-105G VR)
SB 400
Panasonic TZ10

For just $ 12 or so you can buy a reversal adapter for any lens. You just can't use a G lens or this type as you cannot control the aperture. By reversing the lens you can actually get closer without losing any quality or light.