Macro Photography

[britt777]

:confused: I am new to shooting macro. I just got my macro 100mm 2.8 lens. I am having a very hard time focusing. I am trying to take a shot of a anole lizzard. It is probably only 2" long, and when I get as close as I can, I am lucky if I can even get the eyeball in focus. What am I doing wrong? I know that with this lens the DOF is very shallow. I see so many pictures where the spider or small object fills the whole screen. I assume by getting close. I get close and get nothing but blur. Any suggestions would be great. Thank you ;)

[robertwgross]

What is the minimum focus distance for that lens?

What distance are you shooting at (to the front of the lizard)?

What aperture are you using?

---Bob Gross---

[britt777]

fixed 100 mm macro lens canon. I have tried everything from 2.8 to 22.

[rickyd]

The 100 F2.8 will get you excellent 1:1 pictures but if you are trying to get the eyeball of a lizzard you need 2:1 or 3:1 magnification. Get a set of extension tubes (inexpensive) or buy the MPE 65 macro lens (expensive but incredible up to 5:1 magnification).
good luck and have fun.

Rickyd

[robertwgross]

Britt777, what is the minimum focus distance for your lens?

What was the distance to the lizard?

---Bob Gross---

[tim]

Macro photography is hard. That lens can focus down to about 6 inches from the lens, but at that distance and F16 the DOF is 0.02 inches : 0.5mm. Use this DOF calculator (http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html).

One solution is to back away a bit, and crop the image, though you'll lose some detail. You can also try to get the parts of the lizard you want in focus to be parallel to the sensor in the camera.

Another solution is to take multiple pictures and merge them in software. That can be tricky though, and you MUST use a tripod for that, and manual focus - it's an advanced technique I haven't tried myself yet.

You can have a look at a few of my macro shots here (http://mrwild.co.nz/Featured/The_Macro_World/index.html), which illustrate the DOF problem and the best i've managed so far.

[britt777]

I am not sure I am understanding the ratios. I am not trying to get just the eyeball. I am shooting at about a foot away. I am trying to get the lizzard to fill the whole frame. I guess thats not going to happen. The farther back I move the smaller the lizzard gets but the more in focus it is. I thought the whole idea of macr was to make smaller things look bigger.

[britt777]

Bob Im not sure what you mean when you say the minimum focusing distance?

[tim]

I answered that question britt - the 100mm macro lens can focus on an object 6 inches from the lens.

Try manual focus, and use a tripod.

[robertwgross]

I looked it up for you. The Canon 100mm macro lens has a minimum working distance of 5.9 inches.

That means that if you were trying to shoot from 5 inches, you would be in trouble unless you use an extension tube.

Now figure out where the focus point was, like on the lizard's nose. Then figure out where the depth of field would begin and end. If it starts one inch in front of its nose and ends one inch in back of its nose, then the tail of the lizard is going to be out.

---Bob Gross---

[britt777]

thank you so much for your alls help. I feel like a dork. Photo talk can be so difficult at times. I guess I need to look up what extention tubes are and the cost. I know my lenses dont have a depth of field scale.

[britt777]

extention tubes what is a good one?

[tim]

If you can't get a picture in focus with the lens by itself, you have very little chance of getting it working with extension tubes. I recommend you work with what you have until you're comfortable with it.

[robertwgross]

B&H and all of the big Canon dealers can sell an extension tube to fit a Canon EF lens.

Basically, it is a fancy spacer that fits between your lens and the camera. It also has comm lines to connect the lens to the camera.

It's basic function is that it shortens the minimum focus distance of your lens. For example, if I have a lens with minimum focus of 6 inches, then with an extension tube, I might work that down to 3-5 inches, but that depends on the particular lens and the particular extension tube.

---Bob Gross---

[steven]

Before going on to extention tube you need to figure out why your close up pictures are not in focus.
Extention tubes are great but cause a dramatic loss of light, making it all but impossible to AF.

Are you using auto focusing?

Have you tried manual focusing?

With macro work the usual technique is to set the lens on manual focus, select the ratio you want (1:1 would be focusing it as close a possible), then looking through the view finder move the camer towards and away from you subject and when the subject appears to be in focus take the picture.
Give that technique a try and let us know what comes out.

[britt777]

I was going to post a picture of the lizzard, but not sure if I can do that here.

[robertwgross]

Without seeing the lizard result, we can't do anything but guess.

1. Make sure that the shutter speed is fast enough that there is no lizard motion blur. That should not be too hard. Make sure that you don't shake the camera as you snap.
2. Make sure that you are at least back as far as the minimum focus distance. For your purposes, you don't want to get much farther back, though.
3. If you have your camera set on ISO 100, then there might possibly be low enough light that your lens has to open up widely. That's OK, but it will limit your depth of field. If you goose up the ISO to 400 or 800 and try it, the aperture will be closed down a lot, so the depth of field will be much greater (like for getting the nose and the tail in). In fact, if you get as much natural light on the lizard as possible, that can't hurt you.
4. Remember that about a third of the depth of field will be in front of the focus point, and about two thirds will be behind it.

There are probably more ideas, but these just popped into my mind and dribbled out on the keyboard.

---Bob Gross---

[britt777]

thank you Bob, I was going to post the picture here, but don't know how. I will post if I figure out how. Other wise I will work using your advise. Thank you again for all your help...;)

[Pyromaniac]

Hey Tim,

Have you ever used the 50mm f/2.5 macro? The reason I ask is that Ihave never used the 100mm f/2.8, and you seem to like it as much as I like my 50mm f/2.5 (any time people mention macro we both seem to chime in about how well we like our respective lenes). I was just wondering what your thoughts on the 50mm macro are? Besides the magnifacation is there any real difference? Also what about the life size converter if I wanted to get 1:1, would I be better off going to the 100mm or the converter?

[robertwgross]

When I got my first film SLR, many decades ago, I made all sorts of mistakes and ruined all sorts of film. Then, there was noplace to ask questions. I had to learn the hard way. Many years later, I took a photography class, but by then I knew the basics. The class was a good way to really drill it into my head though.

That's the nice thing about digital photography. A digital camera allows us to make mistakes so much faster than we ever could before with film.

I didn't know what an extension tube was until some other Canon shooter handed me one and said "try this".

---Bob Gross---

[tim]

Hey Tim,

Have you ever used the 50mm f/2.5 macro? The reason I ask is that Ihave never used the 100mm f/2.8, and you seem to like it as much as I like my 50mm f/2.5 (any time people mention macro we both seem to chime in about how well we like our respective lenes). I was just wondering what your thoughts on the 50mm macro are? Besides the magnifacation is there any real difference? Also what about the life size converter if I wanted to get 1:1, would I be better off going to the 100mm or the converter?

I've never used it sorry, so I can't comment. It seems to me that a dedicated 100mm lens should be better than a 50mm lens with an extension tube/convertor. That would probably reduce the maximum aperture size too, which isn't overly helpful.

[Pyromaniac]

I have to agree with Bob, the digital give you so much room to just use trial and error to learn the hard way with out being to hard on your wallet, and the forum is great,you can usualy find a lot pf people that have had the same or similar situations to help you out.

And to your origanal question I think you many be trying to get to close, or are trying to use the lenes at max magnifcation from to far away. with my 50mm f/2.5 at the 1:2 it has to be almost at it's minimun distance to focus. So if your setting the lenes to it's 1:1 magnifacation and trying to focus you are going to have a very narrow distance range with in which it will be in focus.

When you get it worked out you'll have to show use some shots of the lizzard.

[ScottE]

Macro is fun. As you have noticed, it is difficult to keep the whole subject in focus. There are several things you can do to compensate. Use a small aperture such as f/22. This often requires a high ISO setting to get an adequate shutter speed. Use a tripod and remote release. At macro distances every little camera movement causes a major loss of sharpness. Compose for the limited depth of field. If you want a lizard picture you will have to shoot from the side so the whole reptile is the same distance from the camera. Alternatively, compose from a frontal angle so the eye is sharp and the body going out of focus in the distance does not matter.

I would get a set of 3 Kenko extension tubes rather than the Canon. The price of 3 Kenko tubes is about the same as one Canon. The optics are identical. (i.e. - none in both)

[robertwgross]

I tried to shoot a studio photo of a lizard one time, but I couldn't figure out where to aim the hair light.

---Bob Gross---

[J Rabin]

Britt.
I do a lot of macro with the Canon 100mm f/2.8. I think you need to get a primer book on macro photography to understand what other posters are saying. There are many, like Michael Freeman, Digital Close-up Lark Books 2004, or try web sites from people who really do it well, like: http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/phototech.html#closeupsandflash

Camera shake is one common enemy. To shoot an image that fills the frame at closest focus (about 1/3 of your 2" lizard) or even if you back off to fit the whole critter in the frame, you will need a tripod. If you don't use a tripod, you will need to use flash to stop the motion (of lizard or hand). If you're going to try hendheld macro, don't drink coffee that day and practice shooters' breathing (depress shutter on exhalation).
If this is indoors, get some daylight balanced fluourescent lights (cool, not hot, so lizard does not get agitated and move more!) to supplement lighting the background behind lizard, even if you do use flash. You will need a minimum 1/100 f/16 to handhold with flash. 1/125 and f/19 to f/22 is better. With a tripod, the shutter speed can be half that.

But, understand you need gobs and gobs of light to shoot like this at ISO 100 or 200. Any ISO higher results in enough noise to defeat the purpose of macro sharpness.

Keep the Camera in manual mode, for reasons dealing with how this affects Canon E-TTL or E-TTL II auto-fill flash reduction performance that are too complicated for a post here.

If you can, use mirror lock-up and a cable release. Using MLU takes two shutter depressions with Canon, one to MLU, next to release shutter.

Another poster suggested checking focus point. Here's how: take your problem images, open them in Canon's EOS Viewer Utility, and check which focus point achieved focus and where it hit. In lower light macro, you are better setting camera to use only center focus point in single shot mode. The external focus points are not as accurate.

Start making yourself a written check list of all the details that have to be set up right. Use the list for months until it is automatic.

This months EOS magazine from Canon's European site has a profile of a phenomenal macro shooter with stunning lizards.
Enjoy, J

[blackviolet]

britt - as ScottE points out, the kenko tubes are exactly the same optics as the canon, and you get 3 sizes to mix and match for about the same price as a single canon.

i have found that instead of using a calculator or trying to figure out ratios, it's easiest to simply experiment. since picking up a set in japan a while ago, i've found that macro really opens up the world we look at - not just bugs, etc. (though they're a lot of fun to take).

http://www.pbase.com/image/38867165.jpg is one example of an ant with kenko tubes and the 85 1.8.

http://www.pbase.com/image/36742188 is an example taken of a gecko's eyeball, using a reversed lens - also taken with the 85 1.8 (reversed 50 1.8)

[britt777]

Thank you so much for all the help and tips. This sure is a great forum. Wonderful people that take the time to help others. Thanks again. Hope I can return the favor some time:D