Macro and close up solutions

[csintexas]

I thought it might be handy to have a general thread on macro and close up photography to share what people are using and their results. I am a noob at this so I have no great knowledge or experience.

So far I have tried a set of Quantaray magnifying filter lenses and the Raynox250. I have also reversed an old minolta AF lens and I have a set of tubes in route.

Today I have been trying the on camera flash and the SEL5018 + Raynox 250.

min subject width: 1.5"

max subject width: 2.25"

The Raynox comes with a quick attachment clamp but requires a step up ring to fit the Sony from 49 to 52-67. It also has threads of 43 on the back so it would also be possible to use a step down ring.

If you want to use the camera flash the adapter blocks the light and you also need to be at the 1/2 max distance to keep the lens + raynox from partially blocking the light even with a step down ring.

I have a Green Lynx Spider that has laid claim to a Salvia flower by my front porch. The Raynox on the 5018 does not get close enough to get great detail. (on the 55-210 it can get much closer)

The on camera flash provided an interesting result where the background became almost black (I added vignetting here to make it black):


The flash did allow higher fstop and shutter and really isolated the subject by darkening the background

this is handheld on a windy day. The flash makes the flower sparkle some which I like but also creates harsh reflections on the spider so could use a diffuser.

Here is the closest I could get with the 55-210 + Raynox250


Still had a black background here as well without flash I think there was some sunlight though

This is from a tripod but it was windy so I may have some blur (not as much detail as I would like to see at that size) Even at f/32 there is not much DoF.

--
-Chris
https://www.flickr.com/photos/cspics/albums

 

[csintexas]

Overall the on camera flash may be an interesting effect for some subjects but not so good for general lighting















--
-Chris

Chris Stewart’s albums | Flickr

www.flickr.com

 

[csintexas]

Here is a dead Yellow Jacket wasp with the 55-210 and Raynor as close as I could get inside with lights and some cropping:







--
-Chris

Chris Stewart’s albums | Flickr

www.flickr.com

 

[Pixel Pooper]

Nice shots. Do you know how much magnification you are getting from the 250 on the 55-210? Judging by the Lynx spider I would guess 4x or more. I use a Tamron 60mm macro with LA-EA1 adapter and a manual speed light. Sharpness is good, but it's only 1:1 and I need more magnification for small spiders. I have reverse mounted a legacy 50mm on the 55-210 which gives me about 4x magnification but sharpness isn't great, especially away from the centre so I'm thinking about getting the Raynox instead.

Here is a couple of shots from the Tamron 60mm:

 

[csintexas]

I think your bee shot is better than the wasp -I had to crop a lot to get that size. The 55-210 with Raynox will shoot 7/16" which I guess is about 2:1 It is workable but it seems like I have seen much better from real 1:1 macro lenses.

The 5018 will only get down to 1.5" with the Raynox.

I will probably end up getting a real macro lens when I figure out what will fit me best. Leaning towards 90+ mm

Have you tried tubes on that Tamron60mm? Seems like it would work well. There is also that Venus 60 that can do 2:1 and focus to infinity.

All of mine so far are better not to zoom in quality.

There are other magnifiers out there -I also have a set that are single lens filters from Quantaray that seem about as good and come in 1,2 and 4x and can be stacked also.

A lot of people seem to use the Konica Minolta Achromatic Diopter Close-Up Macro Lens also,

here is an interesting list I found: http://fuzzcraft.com/achromats.html

 

[Pixel Pooper]

I have tried the 60mm with 26mm of tubes but it only gets to 1.6:1 magnification and with the tubes mounted before the adapter it's a bit awkward. I'm surprised that the Raynox only does 2:1, I thought it would do better than that. I'm looking for about 4:1 so I guess I'll try the reverse 50mm on the 55-210 again, I haven't used that set up much yet so I might still be able to get better results with a bit of practice but it's getting to cold here now to find a lot of bugs.

 

[davelok]

Hi Chris, if you're using only the onboard flash for now, you could make a DIY flash diffuser out of a Pringles can or a cardboard tube. I made one out of the cardboard tube that came with a set of badminton shuttlecocks, kitchen foil, and an empty plastic container with a translucent lid.

This contraption acts as a flash extender as well, and avoids the creation of the lens's shadow on the subject. Some design changes can be made to improve the diffusion.

 

[Pixel Pooper]

I think your bee shot is better than the wasp -I had to crop a lot to get that size. The 55-210 with Raynox will shoot 7/16" which I guess is about 2:1 It is workable but it seems like I have seen much better from real 1:1 macro lenses.

I think the wasp is pretty good. It could be sharper, but I'm guessing shutter speed is the problem there. At that sort of magnification you only need a tiny amount of movement to get motion blur. The best way to avoid motion blur is to use flash, I haven't had much luck shooting hand held with natural light.

 

[muvovum]

I already had a 100mm macro, so to get more than 1:1 I got a x2TC and this is an example of what I can get:

2:1, no crop, 200mm ISO400 f/22

I shot this using a tripod and I had to move the hole set up to focus, what is a pain in the neck, so now I need one of those micro sliding plates.

just for the record, this one without the TC:

1:1, no crop, 100mm ISO100 f/8

the one with the TC looses some quality, due to the TC itself and the diffraction of the narrower aperture, but I think it's still usable.

a6000 + MBIII EF to E + Kenko x2TC + Canon 100mm f2.8L

 

[Nikolausz]

Here you can find an overview about macro and close up solutions for the sony E system:

http://fiberstrobe.blogspot.de/2015/04/macro-and-close-up-photography-options.html

 

[Joachim Wulfers]

I use my SEL 18-200 OSS most of the time for close-up shots. It does do a rather good job at that. Here are two samples:


Common Dandelion









--
Joachim
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jowul/

 

[csintexas]

I guess that the magnification of the Raynox is dependent on the lens for example the 5018 can get down to 1:6 without and 1:2 with.

Since your lens already starts out at 1:1 I would maybe guess it would be 3:1 or so? I guess that plus the tubes would do it. (hopefully someone else knows better)

I think this one is even stronger:

Loading…

www.amazon.com

But I have seen some pretty nice pictures on Flickr with reversed lenses attached to macro lenses.

 

[csintexas]

I guess that the magnification of the Raynox is dependent on the lens for example the 5018 can get down to 1:6 without and 1:2 with.

Since your lens already starts out at 1:1 I would maybe guess it would be 3:1 or so? I guess that plus the tubes would do it. (hopefully someone else knows better)

I think this one is even stronger:

Loading…

www.amazon.com

But I have seen some pretty nice pictures on Flickr with reversed lenses attached to macro lenses.

 

[csintexas]

I see you actually got some pretty good results with that -good creative way to use the on camera flash.

I have been needing a good Flash anyway so that is on my list to get next and then maybe supplement it with an inexpensive ring light like the Neewer 48 Marco LED Ring Light

First I will have to see how much I enjoy real macro (not just very small)

We have just had a good run of overcast days here lately and wind so doing outdoor macro without lighting has been tough.

 

[csintexas]

That is still a pretty good image. I guess that is a general purpose teleconverter and maybe the specially built ones could do slightly better

but it seems like a pretty good solution too me. Is this teleconverter handy for general photography as well? or does it soften the image too much?

Yeah that is the problem with the really small. Then you need a focus rail.. then some focus stacking software etc...

--
-Chris
https://www.flickr.com/photos/cspics/albums

 

[csintexas]

For grins I taped an old minolta lens to the front of the 55-210 and got down to 1/8" which is about 7:1 or so

Here is a shot of my monitor screen:







--
-Chris

Chris Stewart’s albums | Flickr

www.flickr.com

 

[muvovum]

That is still a pretty good image. I guess that is a general purpose teleconverter and maybe the specially built ones could do slightly better

but it seems like a pretty good solution too me. Is this teleconverter handy for general photography as well? or does it soften the image too much?

Yeah that is the problem with the really small. Then you need a focus rail.. then some focus stacking software etc...

 

[csintexas]

Here is the same wasp with the 55-210 and a reversed old Quantaray 28-80 set to 28mm taped to the front. This is full frame except for a little rotation



oops I forgot it was at ISO8000

--
-Chris
https://www.flickr.com/photos/cspics/albums

 

[davelok]

I guess that the magnification of the Raynox is dependent on the lens for example the 5018 can get down to 1:6 without and 1:2 with.

Since your lens already starts out at 1:1 I would maybe guess it would be 3:1 or so? I guess that plus the tubes would do it. (hopefully someone else knows better)

I think this one is even stronger:

http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-Achromatic-Close-Up-Mirrorless-Threaded/dp/B001A5IBCI

But I have seen some pretty nice pictures on Flickr with reversed lenses attached to macro lenses.

The Raynox DCR 150 is a +4.8 diopter lens, and I think the 250 is +8 diopter. For the SEL 55-210 lens, the magnification ratios work out as per the following calculations (for 210mm focal length):




Edit: Copypasta results in unfortunate errors



You can plug in values for any lens and close up filter to get respective resultant values.

 

[jimhughes]

I get great results with the SEL5018 and a cheap extension tube. Light, easy to handle, OSS, and the AF even works. The only drawback is that you have to get very close to the subject.