Macro: will a small tripod suffice?

I'm looking into using a tripod for macro shots. What I want to photograph are mushrooms, insects, flowers and so on. I know that the minimum height of the tripod is important for shooting low to the ground. But all the topics I mentioned are not always on the ground. A beautiful flower can of course also be located a bit higher.

What if I take a Leofoto LS-223C or LS-223CEX, for example, it can be low to the ground. But can I also photograph the somewhat higher subjects with this? But perhaps you know from experience that most subjects are not far from the ground. Of course I can also take a somewhat larger tripod, but the disadvantage of this is the size and weight. Or I would have to buy an extra Tripod Extension for the said tripod. A tripod where you can turn the center column all the way around doesn't seem very useful to me. And yes I know, the ideal tripod does not exist. Of course you have to make concessions.

What is your experience with a tripod for macro photography: Is a small (if it can hold the weight of a Nikon Z6 + Nikkor Z 105mm in my case) tripod as mentioned enough, or is it better to take a slightly larger one? By the way, I also want to use a macro focus rail (now or later).

Gilbert1 wrote:

I'm looking into using a tripod for macro shots. What I want to photograph are mushrooms, insects, flowers and so on. I know that the minimum height of the tripod is important for shooting low to the ground. But all the topics I mentioned are not always on the ground. A beautiful flower can of course also be located a bit higher.

I'm very happy with my Benro Slim Travel Kit tripod. The legs have 4 sections, and it can go close to the ground; but there is no stop on the legs so I can actually place the butt of the shaft on the ground. It folds very small and is quite light weight.

I shoot a lot of mosses and have m4/3 so not a lot of torque. This tripod does not go that high, though I have precariously used it at neck level. So, if I use it for some shots I might kneel. But in m4/3 I only need a tripod for macro focus stacks and astro/landscape.

The most difficult shooting is when mosses are on a vertical wall, which precludes having a wide tripod stance.

On top of logs I also use a 7" tall Oben TT-100 with a very small ballhead. Or I might use my Benro, but just place it on it's side and then find a way to stabilize it.

What if I take a Leofoto LS-223C or LS-223CEX, for example, it can be low to the ground. But can I also photograph the somewhat higher subjects with this? But perhaps you know from experience that most subjects are not far from the ground. Of course I can also take a somewhat larger tripod, but the disadvantage of this is the size and weight. Or I would have to buy an extra Tripod Extension for the said tripod. A tripod where you can turn the center column all the way around doesn't seem very useful to me. And yes I know, the ideal tripod does not exist. Of course you have to make concessions.

What is your experience with a tripod for macro photography: Is a small (if it can hold the weight of a Nikon Z6 + Nikkor Z 105mm in my case) tripod as mentioned enough, or is it better to take a slightly larger one? By the way, I also want to use a macro focus rail (now or later).

I recommend a cheap fake Joby flexible with one of the small Manfrotto ball heads on it. If you need to go lower than that, get a board & screw in a 1/4 × 20 × 2" hanger bolt.

Gary from Seattle wrote:

Gilbert1 wrote:

I'm looking into using a tripod for macro shots. What I want to photograph are mushrooms, insects, flowers and so on. I know that the minimum height of the tripod is important for shooting low to the ground. But all the topics I mentioned are not always on the ground. A beautiful flower can of course also be located a bit higher.

I'm very happy with my Benro Slim Travel Kit tripod. The legs have 4 sections, and it can go close to the ground; but there is no stop on the legs so I can actually place the butt of the shaft on the ground. It folds very small and is quite light weight.

I shoot a lot of mosses and have m4/3 so not a lot of torque. This tripod does not go that high, though I have precariously used it at neck level. So, if I use it for some shots I might kneel. But in m4/3 I only need a tripod for macro focus stacks and astro/landscape.

The most difficult shooting is when mosses are on a vertical wall, which precludes having a wide tripod stance.

On top of logs I also use a 7" tall Oben TT-100 with a very small ballhead. Or I might use my Benro, but just place it on it's side and then find a way to stabilize it.

Thanks. Interesting. I'm also curious about your photos of the mosses.

Jack Tingle wrote:

I recommend a cheap fake Joby flexible with one of the small Manfrotto ball heads on it. If you need to go lower than that, get a board & screw in a 1/4 × 20 × 2" hanger bolt.

Thanks. I'm just wondering if it can carry a camera with macro lens camera in all conditions. And so it doesn't fall over.

Woody S wrote:

An old aluminum frying pan made into a ground pod and a ball head works well -- use the frying pan upside down and you have a very stable platform for low shots.

Thanks. Do you do it yourself this way?

richj20 wrote:

Gilbert1 wrote:

What is your experience with a tripod for macro photography: Is a small (if it can hold the weight of a Nikon Z6 + Nikkor Z 105mm in my case) tripod as mentioned enough, or is it better to take a slightly larger one? By the way, I also want to use a macro focus rail (now or later)

I have three solutions, depending on the situation.

1. A small tripod that lays flat on the ground. One of the center columns is 3" which I use all of the time. The maximum height with the short column is 50" which serves my needs for subjects higher than ground level.

2. A table tripod. It has a fixed height, but is useful in certain situations.

3. Matte board with a tripod mounting plate attached putting the camera flat on the ground.

Thanks for your comment. And what a beautiful picture of the first true leaf.

BBbuilder467 wrote:

Gilbert1 wrote:

I'm looking into using a tripod for macro shots. What I want to photograph are mushrooms, insects, flowers and so on. I know that the minimum height of the tripod is important for shooting low to the ground. But all the topics I mentioned are not always on the ground. A beautiful flower can of course also be located a bit higher.

What if I take a Leofoto LS-223C or LS-223CEX, for example, it can be low to the ground. But can I also photograph the somewhat higher subjects with this? But perhaps you know from experience that most subjects are not far from the ground. Of course I can also take a somewhat larger tripod, but the disadvantage of this is the size and weight. Or I would have to buy an extra Tripod Extension for the said tripod. A tripod where you can turn the center column all the way around doesn't seem very useful to me. And yes I know, the ideal tripod does not exist. Of course you have to make concessions.

What is your experience with a tripod for macro photography: Is a small (if it can hold the weight of a Nikon Z6 + Nikkor Z 105mm in my case) tripod as mentioned enough, or is it better to take a slightly larger one? By the way, I also want to use a macro focus rail (now or later).

I use a Mefoto Daytrip that is quite similar to the Leofoto. I can splay and adjust the legs to avoid the tip over with smaller tripods. It's good for close-ups of mushrooms or fungi on logs or in the forest where you don't have room for a full size tripod. I have an adjustable column, so it's easier to get the precise height. With the reversible column, I can touch the ground with the camera to get under a mushroom.

I've mounted a 3-way pan/tilt with macro rails with no problem. It's basically a travel tripod with really short legs.

Thanks. The only thing I wonder about this tripod is whether the minimum height is not too high. But you can of course do a lot with the reversible column. Because I would also like to photograph under a mushroom. Only using the camera upside down doesn't seem very convenient to me. But you may have a different experience yourself?

Gilbert1 wrote:

Gary from Seattle wrote:

Gilbert1 wrote:

I'm looking into using a tripod for macro shots. What I want to photograph are mushrooms, insects, flowers and so on. I know that the minimum height of the tripod is important for shooting low to the ground. But all the topics I mentioned are not always on the ground. A beautiful flower can of course also be located a bit higher.

I'm very happy with my Benro Slim Travel Kit tripod. The legs have 4 sections, and it can go close to the ground; but there is no stop on the legs so I can actually place the butt of the shaft on the ground. It folds very small and is quite light weight.

I shoot a lot of mosses and have m4/3 so not a lot of torque. This tripod does not go that high, though I have precariously used it at neck level. So, if I use it for some shots I might kneel. But in m4/3 I only need a tripod for macro focus stacks and astro/landscape.

The most difficult shooting is when mosses are on a vertical wall, which precludes having a wide tripod stance.

On top of logs I also use a 7" tall Oben TT-100 with a very small ballhead. Or I might use my Benro, but just place it on it's side and then find a way to stabilize it.

Thanks. Interesting. I'm also curious about your photos of the mosses.

Mosses are best shot one day after rain on a bright overcast day. When too wet leaves stick together. On most images the edges of leaves are not well-defined and detail may be hard to see. Contrast can not typically be found in single-cellular leaves of mosses when leaves are shot one against another. So, that limits detail. I typically shoot 1/3 stop underexposed to reduce glare.

Most of my images are for identification purposes and I will shoot first a handheld image of my tripod or another object to show the habitat; then will shoot detail, aiming for about 3/4 to 1" DOF. Detail may be near 1:1, or may exceed that on some images with a Raynox 250 and on rare occasions with extension tubes. Focus stacked images will almost always yield better results, but on occasion, on an essentially flat field, I may shoot a single handheld image, most likely at F11 M4/3. Higher than that and there is too much diffraction. In focus stacking (mine is in camera) you have to learn to choose a reasonable aperture - F4 to f8 is typical range, and you need to shoot with approximately the right adjustment of "steps" between images. On my in camera focus stacks my camera asks me to set "steps" specific to Olympus cameras. Too much distance between shots and there are OOF areas in the stacked images. Too little and you may not cover sufficient DOF. Over time, I've learned to reduce my aperture towards F4 to F5.6 (m4/3) and to use smaller steps. My focusing in shooting mosses  (and even landscape) is MF with Focus Peaking to define DOF more accurately. A magnify camera function would also work.

Probably shot with the 7" tripod or with the Benro resting on it's side on this log.

Mosses are fascinating and I likely have about 300 different species. But, when I shoot, I always try to pick a shooting angle that gives me good odds of success (DOF), good backgrounds for delineation, and if I can, good compositions. I do shoot some shots just for artistic reasons.

I got round floor level shooting buy buying a cheap child’s school pencil case and filling it with polystyrene beads.  Simple, cheap and light.  Now onto the Mk2 version which is a little bit bigger but still small and light.

Shinyschnapper wrote:

I got round floor level shooting buy buying a cheap child’s school pencil case and filling it with polystyrene beads. Simple, cheap and light. Now onto the Mk2 version which is a little bit bigger but still small and light.

The beanbag is mightier than the monopod!

Gary from Seattle wrote:

Gilbert1 wrote:

Gary from Seattle wrote:

Gilbert1 wrote:

I'm looking into using a tripod for macro shots. What I want to photograph are mushrooms, insects, flowers and so on. I know that the minimum height of the tripod is important for shooting low to the ground. But all the topics I mentioned are not always on the ground. A beautiful flower can of course also be located a bit higher.

I'm very happy with my Benro Slim Travel Kit tripod. The legs have 4 sections, and it can go close to the ground; but there is no stop on the legs so I can actually place the butt of the shaft on the ground. It folds very small and is quite light weight.

I shoot a lot of mosses and have m4/3 so not a lot of torque. This tripod does not go that high, though I have precariously used it at neck level. So, if I use it for some shots I might kneel. But in m4/3 I only need a tripod for macro focus stacks and astro/landscape.

The most difficult shooting is when mosses are on a vertical wall, which precludes having a wide tripod stance.

On top of logs I also use a 7" tall Oben TT-100 with a very small ballhead. Or I might use my Benro, but just place it on it's side and then find a way to stabilize it.

Thanks. Interesting. I'm also curious about your photos of the mosses.

Mosses are best shot one day after rain on a bright overcast day. When too wet leaves stick together. On most images the edges of leaves are not well-defined and detail may be hard to see. Contrast can not typically be found in single-cellular leaves of mosses when leaves are shot one against another. So, that limits detail. I typically shoot 1/3 stop underexposed to reduce glare.

Most of my images are for identification purposes and I will shoot first a handheld image of my tripod or another object to show the habitat; then will shoot detail, aiming for about 3/4 to 1" DOF. Detail may be near 1:1, or may exceed that on some images with a Raynox 250 and on rare occasions with extension tubes. Focus stacked images will almost always yield better results, but on occasion, on an essentially flat field, I may shoot a single handheld image, most likely at F11 M4/3. Higher than that and there is too much diffraction. In focus stacking (mine is in camera) you have to learn to choose a reasonable aperture - F4 to f8 is typical range, and you need to shoot with approximately the right adjustment of "steps" between images. On my in camera focus stacks my camera asks me to set "steps" specific to Olympus cameras. Too much distance between shots and there are OOF areas in the stacked images. Too little and you may not cover sufficient DOF. Over time, I've learned to reduce my aperture towards F4 to F5.6 (m4/3) and to use smaller steps. My focusing in shooting mosses (and even landscape) is MF with Focus Peaking to define DOF more accurately. A magnify camera function would also work.

Mosses are fascinating and I likely have about 300 different species. But, when I shoot, I always try to pick a shooting angle that gives me good odds of success (DOF), good backgrounds for delineation, and if I can, good compositions. I do shoot some shots just for artistic reasons.

Many thanks. Interesting to read. You got a lot out of it. Thanks for sharing the beautiful picture too.

Shinyschnapper wrote:

I got round floor level shooting buy buying a cheap child’s school pencil case and filling it with polystyrene beads. Simple, cheap and light. Now onto the Mk2 version which is a little bit bigger but still small and light.

How handy :-).

Jack Tingle wrote:

I recommend a cheap fake Joby flexible with one of the small Manfrotto ball heads on it. If you need to go lower than that, get a board & screw in a 1/4 × 20 × 2" hanger bolt.

That's also an idea

Woody S wrote:

An old aluminum frying pan made into a ground pod and a ball head works well -- use the frying pan upside down and you have a very stable platform for low shots.

Thanks!

richj20 wrote:

Gilbert1 wrote:

What is your experience with a tripod for macro photography: Is a small (if it can hold the weight of a Nikon Z6 + Nikkor Z 105mm in my case) tripod as mentioned enough, or is it better to take a slightly larger one? By the way, I also want to use a macro focus rail (now or later)

I have three solutions, depending on the situation.

1. A small tripod that lays flat on the ground. One of the center columns is 3" which I use all of the time. The maximum height with the short column is 50" which serves my needs for subjects higher than ground level.

. A table tripod. It has a fixed height, but is useful in certain situations.

3. Matte board with a tripod mounting plate attached putting the camera flat on the ground.

Thank you for your response. What a clever idea of that piece of cardboard. Beautiful photo of that first true leave.