Macro Diffuser Options

[onurthelandscapephotographer]

Dear Community,

As a newcomer to the world of macro photography, I find myself exploring various diffuser options to enhance my shooting experience. The flash I plan to use is the Godox V1s.

I'm currently weighing the pros and cons of two potential setups:

Option 1: Utilize the flash as an off-camera unit paired with the AK-R11 Dome Diffuser.

Option 2: Directly attach the flash to the hot-shoe (on-camera) and employ a macro diffuser like the 'Pope Shield.'

I recognize that there are likely significant differences in the lighting setups and potential output between these options. However, I'm seeking a clearer understanding of the exact disparities and how they manifest in the final photographs.

Despite my efforts, I haven't come across a direct comparison of these alternatives, and I currently only have the flash in my possession.

I would greatly appreciate any insights or comments you could share on this matter. Your expertise will undoubtedly assist me in making an informed decision to elevate my macro photography pursuits.

 

[Ellis Vener]

My advice is start with option 1.

 

[Ed Shapiro]

Dear Community,

As a newcomer to the world of macro photography, I find myself exploring various diffuser options to enhance my shooting experience. The flash I plan to use is the Godox V1s.

I'm currently weighing the pros and cons of two potential setups:

Option 1: Utilize the flash as an off-camera unit paired with the AK-R11 Dome Diffuser.

Option 2: Directly attach the flash to the hot shoe (on-camera) and employ a macro diffuser like the 'Pope Shield.'

I recognize that there are likely significant differences in the lighting setups and potential output between these options. However, I'm seeking a clearer understanding of the exact disparities and how they manifest in the final photographs.

Despite my efforts, I haven't come across a direct comparison of these alternatives, and I currently only have the flash in my possession.

I would greatly appreciate any insights or comments you could share on this matter. Your expertise will undoubtedly assist me in making an informed decision to elevate my macro photography pursuits.

Your choice of light strategies will depend on what, where, and how you intend to shoot, that's the technique you are going to apply. Macro work can be done in indoor and out-of-doores lighting conditions.

If working in natural light, out-of-doors, or with ambient window light as the MAIN source, an on-camera diffused light source can provide FILL LIGHT with natural ligh. The flash's function would be to retain shadow detail and set the lighing ratio (contrast between highlights and shadows). The fill light, atop the camera, is relatively FLAT and casts no shadows of its own. Modeling, rendition of texture, and dimensionality are provided by the natural light. At a close distance, you will probably not need much power- oftentimes a wink of fill light is sufficient depending on the main light source's intensity.

Wiht off-camera lightg, in most scenarios, the off-came light becomes the MAIN source and thereby provides highlights and shadows, modeling, dimensionality, and texture. Your perspective Speedlight has a modelig lamp that will assist your ligh placement in indoor situations but out-of-doors you will need to guestimate placement.

Modofir choice? The Speedlight you have in mind can be fitted with a selection of OME accessories and there are many others on the market. The degree of diffusion you opt for may depend on the main light source. Direct flights may be more compatible with direct sunlight and diffused light works well with open shade overcast overcast ambiance.

what are you shooting- flowers, bugs, tiny metallic parts, whatever? Different subjects may need different lighting approaches. As you advance may want to consider multiple flash usage- one flash off camers and one on.

As for light modofires- There are all kinds of written descriptions, advertising hype, and users' picks and pans. None of them are magical and you need to understand how they work to maximize their potential. Some will be more effective i certain environments and prove useless in others. If you know waht, where, and how you inted to shoot, the gang here can offer more concise advice.

Ed Shapiro- Commercial and Portrait Photographer. Ottawa, Ontario Canada

 

[Andre Yew]

As Ed mentions, it depends on what you're trying to shoot and the look you're trying to achieve.

The best product photographers I know and who shoot small, shiny metal objects build their own diffusers and modifiers from commonly available hardware store material, like frosted plexiglass. They don't build anything too elaborate – basically 3- or 4-sided boxes – but shiny objects require you to control every reflection, so placement of the mods becomes very important as well as controlling light spill.

These are lit with anything from speedlights to 600Ws strobes depending on what they're trying to do. The main mods on the lights are usually snoots, grids, and reflector dishes.

I don't know him, but this is a great look at a BTS of shoot of an iPhone (with another iPhone!). The lighting setup is pretty elaborate:

http://www.peterbelanger.com/blog/2010/07/macworld-iphone-4-cover

 

[onurthelandscapephotographer]

Many thanks for your answers.

My goal is to start with flowers, insects and mushroom and advance my skills trying to get the best shot out of them.

Dome diffusers are generally easier to find and buy, however macro diffusers such as pope shield has long waiting times (approx 10 weeks to get delivered)

I'm currently contemplating shooting during spring, but I'm facing a dilemma regarding the extended waiting times for purchasing equipment. I'm considering opting for a diffuser, but the concern is that the prolonged wait might cause me to miss the ideal spring shooting window.

 

[Ed Shapiro]

From what I can see from the literature, the AK is a nice design because it addresses the "lighting parallax" tha occurs with hot-shoe-mounted Speedlights at close distances, that is, it tilts sufficiently so that the light does not fail to strike the subject weh working at very close distances. With longer macro lenses (Eg. 100, on full frame) it is not as critical as working inches away from a subject.

The unit, as illustrated, seems to be very convenient for hand-held shooting.

Waht concerns me, for you, are the aesthetics and methodology of the lighting. The on-camera light, modified or, not will still produce flat lightg- it will be softer and more natural but is not likely to render texture and dimension in flowers. It will be a good fill source if the exposure and ratio are managed correctly.

There is no reason for you to miss the Spring flora. It is easy enough to improvise some sort of difuser for yor speedlight—a simple white translucent cloth or small pie of frosted plastic can do the job.

There is yet another alternative. I do quite a bit of flower photoghay for a horticultural society and a floral and landscape company. For on-location work and out-of-doors, my favorite method is natural light. All I use is a few small reflectors and a gobo (small black flag) so I can add or subtract light from various directions. In the studio, I often simulate skylights with a large softbox and use the same method.



















Ed Shapiro- Commercial and Portrait Photographer. Ottawa, Ontario Canada

 

[Ellis Vener]

Dear Community,

As a newcomer to the world of macro photography, I find myself exploring various diffuser options to enhance my shooting experience. The flash I plan to use is the Godox V1s.

I'm currently weighing the pros and cons of two potential setups:

Option 1: Utilize the flash as an off-camera unit paired with the AK-R11 Dome Diffuser.

Option 2: Directly attach the flash to the hot-shoe (on-camera) and employ a macro diffuser like the 'Pope Shield.'

I recognize that there are likely significant differences in the lighting setups and potential output between these options. However, I'm seeking a clearer understanding of the exact disparities and how they manifest in the final photographs.

Despite my efforts, I haven't come across a direct comparison of these alternatives, and I currently only have the flash in my possession.

I would greatly appreciate any insights or comments you could share on this matter. Your expertise will undoubtedly assist me in making an informed decision to elevate my macro photography pursuits.

I had never heard of the "Pope's Shield" light modifier before, so I had to look it up. it's an intriguing modifier. https://popeshield.com/?v=7516fd43adaa

 

[RWD_Macro]

I have been testing different options for the last year.

All of this is from the perspective of handheld macro outdoor. I shoot with a Canon R5, Laowa 90mm 2x f/2.8, and a Godox V1. I have the TT350 and MF12s as well. Even though the AK Diffuser is my current diffuser, I'm in the midst of considering the Laowa 85mm 2x f/5.6 since it is half the size and weight. But that means the AK wouldn't be a good fit any longer.

The off camera w/dome diffuser is tricky as the light can still be harsh and you're stuck trying to hold the camera and flash.

The V1 with the dome and a shoot through diffuser works fairly well.

I do not like the Popeshield. It took 12weeks and it requires higher power to shoot through. It does diffuse very well, but it also has a warmer tint than it should. Also, it is cumbersome if you are trying to shoot in between branches, or get very close up shots.

The AK diffuser provides the best results by far. The light I get is wonderfully diffused with no hot spots. It ships much quicker than the Popeshield too. It can still be tricky to get into some positions for close up work.

Bottom line, if you're shooting outdoors, AK is the choice.

Note: Cygnustech makes a similar diffuser, but you can only reach the guy on instagram and he's in Australia.

 

[adew1]

Best option is the AK or Cygnustech diffuser. If you're in the US, the AK makes more sense for shipping charges, but Brendan at Cygnustech is very responsive and ships fast and his prices are not unreasonable. Delivery time for both (to Europe) was about 2 weeks, AK slightly faster. My wife (avid macro shooter) has both and currently prefers the AK. The Pope is big, cumbersome and unwieldy.

In her opinion, pros and cons of each:

Cygnustech is easier to mount and dismount and folds completely flat, which is an advantage when travelling or when storing the diffuser off camera. AK provides a smidge more light for the same flash power thanks to its more enclosed design. With macro you're often shooting with small apertures to maximise DOF, so a little bit of "free" flash power is useful. The AK is more complicated to mount and dismount and does not fold fully flat when off camera. In terms of quality of light, no appreciable difference between the two. Both have good colour rendition, without obvious tints.

Disadvantage of both these diffusers is that they are camera/lens/flash unit specific and are made in different dimensions to suit different combinations. Obviously, swapping one similarly sized lens (or flash unit) for another is not a problem, but swapping between, say, a 65mm Laowa and a Zuiko 90mm would be problematic, as would be swapping between a TT350 and V1.

Off camera flash can be great for static subjects, but gets tricky with insects, and is even trickier when you're shooting insects using manual focus.

Posting your question on the Macro Photography forum here on DPR would probably elicit more responses.

 

[Ed Shapiro]

I have been testing different options for the last year.

All of this is from the perspective of handheld macro outdoor. I shoot with a Canon R5, Laowa 90mm 2x f/2.8, and a Godox V1. I have the TT350 and MF12s as well. Even though the AK Diffuser is my current diffuser, I'm in the midst of considering the Laowa 85mm 2x f/5.6 since it is half the size and weight. But that means the AK wouldn't be a good fit any longer.

The off camera w/dome diffuser is tricky as the light can still be harsh and you're stuck trying to hold the camera and flash.

The V1 with the dome and a shoot through diffuser works fairly well.

I do not like the Popeshield. It took 12weeks and it requires higher power to shoot through. It does diffuse very well, but it also has a warmer tint than it should. Also, it is cumbersome if you are trying to shoot in between branches, or get very close up shots.

The AK diffuser provides the best results by far. The light I get is wonderfully diffused with no hot spots. It ships much quicker than the Popeshield too. It can still be tricky to get into some positions for close up work.

Bottom line, if you're shooting outdoors, AK is the choice.

Note: Cygnustech makes a similar diffuser, but you can only reach the guy on instagram and he's in Australia.

Thanks for sharing your experience and WELOME to the forum and this section.


Ed Shapiro- Commercial and Portrait Photographer. Ottawa, Ontario Canada

 

[A74Me]

if you want to shoot texture you need to shoot off camera flash and fire the light across the subject not straight at it .use a 6x10inch mini softbox diffuser ,there is plenty on the market.