? Macro Critters & Lighting

[djtowle]

I am thinking of trying my had er camera at taking some macro photos of bugs, insects and other creepies. I have a 100mm macro and some tubes. But haven't used them much for the little critters at this point. My question(s):

Is a macro flash (24ex, 14ex ringlight) pretty much a necessity?

How do you shoot bugs? Handheld, available light? Handheld & flash? Tripods, flash, reflectors etc. This seems a little impractical if the Grasshopper decides to hop <g>

Is focal length/working distance a big issue. ie will a 180mm macro be more usefull then the 100mm.

Is there any specific task for the 14ex ringlight that the $$$ 24ex cannot do?

I've read about all of these contraptions people come up with for macro work ie reversed 50mm with guts removed on the end of a zoom lens, etc. Any optical advantages to these rigs over say a 180mm and extension tubes, and or 500d lens? Or is it a cost issue?

Thanks in advance for any startup advice you can give.

[Jon]

I am thinking of trying my had er camera at taking some macro photos of bugs, insects and other creepies. I have a 100mm macro and some tubes. But haven't used them much for the little critters at this point. My question(s):

Is a macro flash (24ex, 14ex ringlight) pretty much a necessity?

If you're going to make a regular thing of macro work, yes it will be.

How do you shoot bugs? Handheld, available light? Handheld & flash? Tripods, flash, reflectors etc. This seems a little impractical if the Grasshopper decides to hop <g>

If you're lucky, they'll all light in bright sunny spots. We're never that lucky, are we? so I'd go with on-camera flash as at least available. Like you say, separately-mounted flash, incandescent, or reflector light sources don't move with the bug.

Is focal length/working distance a big issue. ie will a 180mm macro be more usefull then the 100mm.

A 180 mm will give you almost twice the working distance of a 100 mm at 1:1. If you're dealing with something that doesn't like having the lens shoved in their face this is a real advantage. It also means you're going to be a little less likely to be casting extra shadows on the subject.

Is there any specific task for the 14ex ringlight that the $$$ 24ex cannot do?

Looks to me more the other way around - the 24 has modelling lights and separately-positionable heads so you have more control over the lighting angles. With the 14, you can vary the power between the two sides, but that's about it (without an external slaved flash).

I've read about all of these contraptions people come up with for macro work ie reversed 50mm with guts removed on the end of a zoom lens, etc. Any optical advantages to these rigs over say a 180mm and extension tubes, and or 500d lens? Or is it a cost issue?

Thanks in advance for any startup advice you cangive.

It's partly a cost issue. A reversed 50 is essentially a +20 diopter close-up lens with very high quality optics. But it'll give you a severely-limited working distance and magnification with any given principal lens. A 180 will get you continuously from infinity to 1:1, and with a few extension tubes, will get you beyond that (how far depends on which tubes you add).