Comments/suggestions on LordV macrophotography thread

[LordV]

Please add any comments / suggestions on the LordV macrophotography post here rather than clogging up the original thread which will be locked.
Thanks brian v.

[slitherjef]

Thought you said you where not much of a writer in a previous thread :p :lol:

Seriously though, thanks for this write up, and I do have a question:
I do have a 430ex II and a ST-E2 so I can fire the flash off camera, however I am not quite satisfied with the set up because I tend to get shadows and sometimes, depending on my set up, an uneven gradient. I thought about getting the expensive MT-24Ex but started to wonder if getting a 580ex II to add to my set up would be a better choice? I would love to hear your thoughs on this

[LordV]

Thought you said you where not much of a writer in a previous thread :p :lol:

Seriously though, thanks for this write up, and I do have a question:
I do have a 430ex II and a ST-E2 so I can fire the flash off camera, however I am not quite satisfied with the set up because I tend to get shadows and sometimes, depending on my set up, an uneven gradient. I thought about getting the expensive MT-24Ex but started to wonder if getting a 580ex II to add to my set up would be a better choice? I would love to hear your thoughs on this

Not really certain I can answer this, I've just got rather used to using a single flash light source and find that fine for my requirements. I think a second large flash would be rather awkward for a hand held set up but might be fine for a tripod setup.
With a single flash and a largish diffuser setup near the end of the lens I don't find shadows too much of a problem, the main issue I have is when the bug is facing in the wrong direction as I can't easily move the flash over to the other side with my setups but that is not a serious problem.
If you are planning to use 2 light sources on a handheld setup then the MT-24Ex may be the best choice.
Brian v.

[Lester Wareham]

Thought you said you where not much of a writer in a previous thread :p :lol:

Seriously though, thanks for this write up, and I do have a question:
I do have a 430ex II and a ST-E2 so I can fire the flash off camera, however I am not quite satisfied with the set up because I tend to get shadows and sometimes, depending on my set up, an uneven gradient. I thought about getting the expensive MT-24Ex but started to wonder if getting a 580ex II to add to my set up would be a better choice? I would love to hear your thoughs on this

Not really certain I can answer this, I've just got rather used to using a single flash light source and find that fine for my requirements. I think a second large flash would be rather awkward for a hand held set up but might be fine for a tripod setup.
With a single flash and a largish diffuser setup near the end of the lens I don't find shadows too much of a problem, the main issue I have is when the bug is facing in the wrong direction as I can't easily move the flash over to the other side with my setups but that is not a serious problem.
If you are planning to use 2 light sources on a handheld setup then the MT-24Ex may be the best choice.
Brian v.

I used to work with two twin flashes on brackets in my film days, one flash was a Vivitar 283 and the other was smaller.

Of course it was all manual flash exposure then, but ergonomically it was quite an awkward setup, just about usable in the field handheld in landscape but not portrait orientations. Flash position flexibility was no-existent although there are better brackets now.

I use the twin flash now (it is the only flash I have) and find it great, I have to say Brian does seem to get super soft light with his mega diffuser setup however.

[John_B]

LordV,
Great idea and well written to help answer questions for macro photography :)

[Dalantech]

I like the control that I get with the MT-24EX over the way that shadows fall in a scene. The drawback is that two light sources will also give you two sets of specular highlights to deal with.

One of the best two standard flash setups I've seen is the one used by Blepharopsis (http://blepharopsis.deviantart.com/art/stag-and-beetles-90927648) -beautiful diffusion and light that makes the subject look very 3D.

Excellent beginner article Brian!

[Warl0rd]

thats not a book, but you have to start somewhere :D

[Meanderthal]

Bravo. Thank you from a beginner in macro. It's very helpful to have all I need to get started in one well written summary - without the confusion that can result when the experts start discussing the finer points.

[JLew24asu]

Kudos to you for putting that info together. you are a pioneer and the World's BEST Macro photographer. :)

[themadman]

Thanks for writing it! I am looking forward to future installments.

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

Great job, Brian!

Thanks for doing this.

I look forward to learning a lot from the MACRO LORD!!

[LordV]

Thanks for the comments.
Hope it will be useful. Obviously it will just be my limited viewpoint on macro shooting but thought it might be a useful exercise for me if I do ever get round to trying to do a book.
BTW you can thank the freezing weather we are experiencing in the UK for this :)

If there is anything specific you want me to cover (that I might know about) post a comment here.

Brian V.

[minh2pac]

Hey LordV, I currently have Tamron 90mm and plan to upgrade to Tamron 180mm later. If I buy Canon MR-14EX Macro Ring Lite, will that work for both Tamron lenses? thank you.

[LordV]

Hey LordV, I currently have Tamron 90mm and plan to upgrade to Tamron 180mm later. If I buy Canon MR-14EX Macro Ring Lite, will that work for both Tamron lenses? thank you.

You would need to check that you have/ can get an adapter ring for for the filter size of the tamron 180 but yes it should work but I think a camera mounted normal flash would also work just as well with the 180.
You would need one of these
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-Flash-Macro-Adapter-EF180mm/dp/B0000C4GDR
You may have realised from the comment in the macro guide I would not consider a Tamron 180 an upgrade from the 90mm lens- quite the reverse in fact. Unless you are not handholding the lens and really need the extra working distance or want the nicer background bokeh I would not change the 90mm lens.
Brian v.

[Dalantech]

...You may have realised from the comment in the macro guide I would not consider a Tamron 180 an upgrade from the 90mm lens- quite the reverse in fact. Unless you are not handholding the lens and really need the extra working distance or want the nicer background bokeh I would not change the 90mm lens.
Brian v.

I'd also add that you might not like the light quality of the MR-14EX -even with ratio control it's going to look flat. Also the working distance is greater with the 180mm, and the level of diffusion you get with a flash is relative to the distance between the flash and the subject -get the flash closer to what you're shooting and the diffusion gets better. So you might like the light quality of the MR-14EX with the 90mm, only to get disappointed when you use it on the 180mm...

[dicklaxt]

You know I will be here with bells on digging for info,thanks again

dick

[dicklaxt]

It never ceases to amaze me of how much data you old cranium can store.I have gotten myself to the point where I can follow a conversation or dissertation but what really amazes me is how the experienced shooters can recall and apply this knowledge to a given scenario.It is intimidating to say the least but I thank you all once again for the effort you put forth to teach others.

In scanning over the info on Speedlite Units and my not being an owner of one breeds a some questions as I don't have a manual to reseach.

1. Does the metering info get processed in the camera onboard computer and sent to to the flash unit or does it go directly to flash unit and then processed then subsequently fires the flash?

2. Is there a way to tell if 3rd party or used flash units are compatible with ones camera?

3. If I were to find a used flash unit would you say go for it or always buy new for this type equipment?

4. I am assuming the 430EX is adequte for the weekend duffer like me.

dick

[Warl0rd]

1) in E-TTLII, flash pre fires, then camera computes adjust, then flash fires.

2) check flash manual for e-ttl compat.

3) go for it

4) sure

[eko]

You can get round this problem by using a reversed older manual lens which has an aperture control ring.
Another reversing technique is to reverse lens onto the front of another lens. For this you need a male/male lens reversing coupler that has filter threads fitting both lenses. This has one advantage over the previous reversing method in that you retain aperture control of the main lens. This is normally done with a smaller focal length lens reversed onto a longer lens.

Hi Brian, Thanks for all the info your work is really awsome. I have a question about the lens reversing.

If you could clarify the lens order for doing this that would be excelent.
Do you have to use the smaller lens reversed or can you do the longer lens reversed (is it because if the weight hanging off the lens that you would want the smaller one the furthest out)
When you are talking about an older manual lens are you talking about an older fd lens and if so would that lens be the one closer to the camera or further away


sorry for my noobness :) Thanks again, Ellie

[Warl0rd]

If you look at the magnification formula you will understand that is better to put the longer focal lens on the body then couple the shorter focal reversed lens.

He means old manual lens that have an aperture ring (http://www.aiconversions.com/images/VGA501.4unconverted.JPG), the brand or model doesn't matter since its reversed so no contact is made with the mount.

[eko]

gotcha thanks for the quick reply Warl0rd :D

[LLBNY]

Really stupid, but I was wondering.
1 -Is there any reason to reverse a lense if it is a macro lense?
2 - what is the purpose to reverse the lense?
Thanks

[LordV]

Really stupid, but I was wondering.
1 -Is there any reason to reverse a lense if it is a macro lense?
2 - what is the purpose to reverse the lense?
Thanks
Going to show my level of ignorance here as I don't know the answer to either question. I suspect the answer to #1 is no and #2 has something to do with the asymetric design of camera lenses but fairly obviously it allows you to focus closer.
Brian v.

[LLBNY]

Oh. I was always afraid to ask!
Thanks

[dicklaxt]

Now you talk about ignorance in the first degree,,,,,,,,here is an example of how I would attempt to explain the answers and my answers are certainly open to any and all challenge's.

1. No, because the focus/working distance being close as determined by the lens construction of capturing the converging and/or diverging incoming light waves would now cause the focus/working distance to change and become larger thus defeating the purpose.

2. Opposite of #1,,basically lens parameters now need to change the focus/working distance to a smaller value which would be done by reversing/alterering the pre determined values.

Now all of the above is clear to me(I think),bring it on:)

dick

[eko]

ok so I have another noob question. When reversing a lens onto another lense, is there a particular aperture that you should be setting the extra lens (the one all the way out front) to?

really any additional information you can give about lens reversing would be very helpful :)

thanks again

[LordV]

ok so I have another noob question. When reversing a lens onto another lense, is there a particular aperture that you should be setting the extra lens (the one all the way out front) to?

really any additional information you can give about lens reversing would be very helpful :)

thanks again

Think as commented already , when reversing one lens onto another, the reversed lens is normally used wide open and focused on infinity. The focus position of the main lens does not matter that much but is normally at minimum focus.
If the reversed lens causes no vignetting then it might be worth trying to shut the aperture down a bit as I gather this can in some cases improve the IQ of the system.
Brian V.

[eko]

thanks again for the response :) that makes perfect sense!

[kwest]

Very good presentation with some useful ideas and explanations. Idea I have enjoyed most is your Coke tin diffuser works like a dream with my 580 EX, want to try it out with my 180mm and difficult to approach insects. Enjoyed the reverse lens fstop explanation as this is a technique I have not tried out, but get questions on it when I do my macro presentation. I will add you as one of my references. Congrats and thanks again for finding the time to put it all together. Kirk.

[LordV]

New sections added today on subjects and methods.
Brian v.

[dicklaxt]

Thanks for todays writings,I found your tachnique to be interesting and things were in a natural setting and not staged as much as i thought they might be.

The reference to focus stacking of refractions was also very helpful in me being better able to understand the procedure itself.No doubt I will eventually have to move in that direction.I notice that the MPE-65 is pictured,is that your primary lens for all macro?

dick

[LordV]

Thanks for todays writings,I found your tachnique to be interesting and things were in a natural setting and not staged as much as i thought they might be.

The reference to focus stacking of refractions was also very helpful in me being better able to understand the procedure itself.No doubt I will eventually have to move in that direction.I notice that the MPE-65 is pictured,is that your primary lens for all macro?

dick
Thanks for the comments Dick.

I often use a normal 1:1 macro lens eg Tamron 90 especially for larger bugs and flowers.

[yuribox]

Thanks for starting this thread.
When you reverse the lens and take macro picture, will there be light fall our or make lens slow?
Thanks in advance.

[LordV]

Thanks for starting this thread.
When you reverse the lens and take macro picture, will there be light fall our or make lens slow?
Thanks in advance.

Any method which magnifies the image will give a light loss compared to normal use. Something you get used to with macro shooting. It's not normally a problem as you often want to shoot in the aperture range F8 -f11 anyway.

Brian v.

[dicklaxt]

Focus,,,,,,,,,I am having trouble with the hand held and clicking off the exposure at just the right time.Do you stop and do fine tuning of the focus at the time of nearing optimum focus or just try to cactch it at the optimum as you are moving thru.I see the "best in focus" appear in the view finder but I miss it in the exposure,I can't seem to co-ordinate everything to make the capture.It seems like I'm only getting about 1 in 25.The shallow DOF does not help either LOL

dick

[LordV]

Focus,,,,,,,,,I am having trouble with the hand held and clicking off the exposure at just the right time.Do you stop and do fine tuning of the focus at the time of nearing optimum focus or just try to cactch it at the optimum as you are moving thru.I see the "best in focus" appear in the view finder but I miss it in the exposure,I can't seem to co-ordinate everything to make the capture.It seems like I'm only getting about 1 in 25.The shallow DOF does not help either LOL

dick

I tend to take the shot as I'm moving through focus with hand held shots (it's very hard to try and hold focus). I suspect I must actually use a premature trigger finger and guess when I'm just coming into focus. One of the things you get better at with lots of practice. I do often take several shots though- often on the sway back as well.
Much easier to do this if you are resting the lens on something then you can hold focus.

BTW I assume you have calibrated the eyepiece diopter for your eye ?

Brian v.
Brian v.

[Warl0rd]

I also don't stop and take the shot. I keep the shutter half pressed and keep moving slowing towards the subject, once the focus reaches the subject I get ready to click, I keep moving at a steady rate and once the focus is about to reach the place I want (like eyes of the bug) I click. its just a mix of practice, getting used to the camera lag and luck.

Usually after taking the shot I have to start the process all over, but I think I'm getting better at it (take more shots quicker)

[dicklaxt]

Yes I have adjusted the diopter but will double check it.

It seems you both take a similar approach and that was the conclusion I had reckoned with to be the correct answer or at least the most doable.

Back to the practice squad:)

dick

[dicklaxt]

Another question,when using the flash off camera as you have pictured, mounted to a bracket attached to the camera is there any other hardware required other than the flash cord required?.I assume the cord has a hot shoe mating connection on one end and another hotshoe itself on the other end that the flash would mount to.If that is correct how does the hotshoe on the cord attach to the bracket?I've wore out my fingers looking for a block diagram of sorts denoting all the hardware and options but haven't found one,anyone got a link?????

dick

[Warl0rd]

that depends on the bracket you buy and the cord you buy.

[LordV]

Another question,when using the flash off camera as you have pictured, mounted to a bracket attached to the camera is there any other hardware required other than the flash cord required?.I assume the cord has a hot shoe mating connection on one end and another hotshoe itself on the other end that the flash would mount to.If that is correct how does the hotshoe on the cord attach to the bracket?I've wore out my fingers looking for a block diagram of sorts denoting all the hardware and options but haven't found one,anyone got a link?????

dick

Yes you are right about the cord. You either fit them into a hot shoe mount or like I do use a standard 1/4 " bolt (on a ballhead) which fits into the bottom of the of the cord fitting.
Brian v.

[MMURAD]

LordV,
thanks so much for all the information and great shots that you post. It has got me excited about trying out macro photography.
I am just trying to decide which macro lens to get first. I am trying to decide between the tamron 90 or the sigma 105. I see you have both and wonder what you recommend.
beside focal length is there a IQ difference or build quality difference. They are both the same price right now on amazon.
Thanks in advance.

[LordV]

LordV,
thanks so much for all the information and great shots that you post. It has got me excited about trying out macro photography.
I am just trying to decide which macro lens to get first. I am trying to decide between the tamron 90 or the sigma 105. I see you have both and wonder what you recommend.
beside focal length is there a IQ difference or build quality difference. They are both the same price right now on amazon.
Thanks in advance.
Not used the Tamron90 nearly as much as the sigma 105 but think the Tamron might be slightly better on IQ.
Brian v.

[MMURAD]

Not used the Tamron90 nearly as much as the sigma 105 but think the Tamron might be slightly better on IQ.
Brian v.

Is that due to working distance?
I was going to get an 85 1.8 for portrait shots, but was thinking the tamron 90 is close in focal length plus has the macro ability. seems like a really sharp lens.
But if the tamron is a compromise in macro compared to the Sigma I would rather get the better macro lens, I can always get an 85 1.8 later.

[LordV]

Is that due to working distance?
I was going to get an 85 1.8 for portrait shots, but was thinking the tamron 90 is close in focal length plus has the macro ability. seems like a really sharp lens.
But if the tamron is a compromise in macro compared to the Sigma I would rather get the better macro lens, I can always get an 85 1.8 later.

No compromise - given the choice between the two I would get the Tamron again.
Brian v.

[MMURAD]

No compromise - given the choice between the two I would get the Tamron again.
Brian v.

thanks you sir

[themadman]

I have heard for general photography the Sigma doesn't fair well due to a high percent of out of focus shots. As Brain has said, if you plan to take a lot of non-macros with a macro lens, the Tamron is a better bet.

[skygod44]

Just spotted the main thread and this one Brian, and have to add my thanks for writing down in one sticky what you've said many times on various occasions.

And to see some solid advice for people pondering if they could start doing macro work is great - the more the merrier, I say!

Thanks again, and catch you soon.

Regards,
Simon

[dicklaxt]

I am going to setup a flash arrangement similar to what Brian has done with the bracket and getting right in close.I don't know a thing about flash and their specs...........

I do have a limited budget for my toys so I'll ask do I really need a 430EX at "X" dollars or would a 3rd party XYZ at "1/3 or 1/2X" dollars satisfy this fill light for macro work.I won't be using a flash for any other work at my age unless it may be a snapshot in the house of the "Old Grey Mare":)

dick

[themadman]

I have been looking at a second flash recently since I have a 430EX II. If I just wanted dirt cheap the YN-465 seems like a decent product but it's output is weaker than my 430EX II. I am not considering the Sigma 530 Super because it has a higher output than my 430EX II and still has ETTL, only costs about 200.

[LordV]

Re flashes- not too much experience with non- canon flashes- used to use a sigma but had one die just over a year old and the second went kaput within the guarantee period. Big advantage of the 430Ex for me is it does work properly with all my camera bodies (some 3rd party ones do not), it has FEC control on the flash which is much more conveniant than trying to change it on the camera, they recycle fast and will "flash" on lower battery charges. Had no problems with them since I started using them about 3 years ago.
Brian v.

[Canon7DDSLR]

hey Brian, Saw your gallery.. all shots are fantanstic! just curious for sure close up shots, can i hv a look on your whole macro setup.. u hv pic on the setup? i'm actually thinking of getting the basic equipment, for my macro photography, bracket for flash or light to reach the subject and etc.. Currently, i hv a 5DMKII with 100mm usm lens and a nissin flash 622i. what else should i need?

[LordV]

hey Brian, Saw your gallery.. all shots are fantanstic! just curious for sure close up shots, can i hv a look on your whole macro setup.. u hv pic on the setup? i'm actually thinking of getting the basic equipment, for my macro photography, bracket for flash or light to reach the subject and etc.. Currently, i hv a 5DMKII with 100mm usm lens and a nissin flash 622i. what else should i need?

Pics in the accompanying thread to this one here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807056
Basically camera/macro lens/flash on bracket with diffuser - you need an off camera flash cord for this.

Brian V.

[dicklaxt]

I just ordered this kit,,,it's a $100 under the 430EX and the spec is nearly as good,a lot of places are sold out.The kit has a couple of extra's so probably another 25-30 dollar savings.


http://www.amazon.com/Vivitar-STO-FEN-Batteries-Charger-Cleaning/dp/B00206DMCA/ref=sr_1_133?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1263648657&sr=1-133

dick

[Warl0rd]

a good alternative to the 430EX is the metz 48-af1, its full E-TTLII compatible, a bit cheaper(50€ less in europe), more powerful and more functions on the head.

[yuribox]

Thanks for your knowledge and info.
Your article helped and inspired me in many different ways.
Thanks for sharing.

[Canon7DDSLR]

does anyone know what is the differences between Manfrotto 330 and a manfrotto 330B flash bracket? esp the spec? Can the 330 be used on 5DMKII with the 100mm macro lens?

[MMURAD]

I am going to buy a macro lens this week and I am driving myself nuts with the decision.

I was ready your info thread again ( amazing amount of useful info there, thanks again) and you stated that 100mm focal length is optimal.
So with a crop should I get the tamron 60 instead of the 90? I see you did a lot of your work with the Tamron 90 and Sigma 105 on a crop. So I am a bit confused.
Also that tamron 60 is more expensive, is that simply because it is f/2?
It does not seem to be a very popular lens and since most macro shots are stopped down not sure why f/2 would be that big of an advantage.
maybe the 60 is a good hybrid macro/portrait lens?

[LordV]

I am going to buy a macro lens this week and I am driving myself nuts with the decision.

I was ready your info thread again ( amazing amount of useful info there, thanks again) and you stated that 100mm focal length is optimal.
So with a crop should I get the tamron 60 instead of the 90? I see you did a lot of your work with the Tamron 90 and Sigma 105 on a crop. So I am a bit confused.
Also that tamron 60 is more expensive, is that simply because it is f/2?
It does not seem to be a very popular lens and since most macro shots are stopped down not sure why f/2 would be that big of an advantage.
maybe the 60 is a good hybrid macro/portrait lens?
No I meant a 100mm lens for working distance which is the same for a 1.6 crop as FF camera, so I would get the Tamron 90.
Brian v.

[LordV]

Just added another section to the original thread here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807056 on Picture processing.
Brian v.

[dicklaxt]

I read the new section and am sure it fits in but it is a little to deep for my comprehension of PP so I have it filed away and will get back to it in time. A lot of folks no doubt will have considerable interest.

Keep the info coming ,I'm learning more and nore every day,my wife really thinks I'm smart and I didn't tell her any different.:lol:

dick

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

Brian, you mention that when you focus, esp using the MPE-65, you generally move the camera/lens back and forth to acquire focus, and press the shutter as you are doing so. (If I understood this correctly)...

...now do you use single shot, or do you have the camera on continuous, and hold the shutter down to take a "series" of shots at whatever FPS rate your camera fires (providing the flash recycles fast enough) to allow you to capture a series of shots with hopefully one of them being at it's "sharpest"?

Having a flash that would be capable of firing @ 10 fps, along with a 1D Mark III or Mark IV body would be sweet in a situation like this. At least IMHO. :lol:

[LordV]

Brian, you mention that when you focus, esp using the MPE-65, you generally move the camera/lens back and forth to acquire focus, and press the shutter as you are doing so. (If I understood this correctly)...

...now do you use single shot, or do you have the camera on continuous, and hold the shutter down to take a "series" of shots at whatever FPS rate your camera fires (providing the flash recycles fast enough) to allow you to capture a series of shots with hopefully one of them being at it's "sharpest"?

Having a flash that would be capable of firing @ 10 fps, along with a 1D Mark III or Mark IV body would be sweet in a situation like this. At least IMHO. :lol:
No I'm always in single shot mode and generally don't fire faster than about once a sec when I'm doing mutiple shots. I do try to focus on specific bits for each shot but some times do a few odd shots when I'm backing away again.
Brian v.

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

Thanks. Figured you shot in single shot mode, but just thought I'd ask.

[Warl0rd]

also don't forget about flash recycle, sometimes making continuous shot impossible

[orionmystery]

Excellent write-up Brian :).

Maybe you can add a link to this thread in your write-up.

Oh one question - how do you secure your O-ME53 1.2X magnifier to your camera? It's really loose on my 40D.

I've lost mine for no less than 10 times, but miraculously, been able to find it back each time...whew...but i'm not going to let it happen again...

thanks :)

[LordV]

Excellent write-up Brian :).

Maybe you can add a link to this thread in your write-up.

Oh one question - how do you secure your O-ME53 1.2X magnifier to your camera? It's really loose on my 40D.

I've lost mine for no less than 10 times, but miraculously, been able to find it back each time...whew...but i'm not going to let it happen again...

thanks :)

Thanks Kurt :)
Assume you mean in my signature - will see what I can do.

re- the viewfinder magnifier- Have to admit I don't use it now but when I tried it it was slightly lose but never came off. Suspect you may be able to do something with a couple of tiny drops of araldite on the opposite fitting edges of the magnifier (not attached to the camera)- let them set and then shave them off a bit until you get a snug fit.

Brian v.

[orionmystery]

Thanks Kurt :)
Assume you mean in my signature - will see what I can do.

re- the viewfinder magnifier- Have to admit I don't use it now but when I tried it it was slightly lose but never came off. Suspect you may be able to do something with a couple of tiny drops of araldite on the opposite fitting edges of the magnifier (not attached to the camera)- let them set and then shave them off a bit until you get a snug fit.

Brian v.

Thanks for the tip, Brian.

Oh i mean putting this link:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807057

in the body of the "Macrophotography by LordV" thread...(not your signature)...so whoever reading your "Macrophotography by LordV" will know they can ask a question here:)

But it's great that you put: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807056 in your signature, now anyone amazed by your awesome photos will go read it :)

[LordV]

Thanks for the tip, Brian.

Oh i mean putting this link:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807057

in the body of the "Macrophotography by LordV" thread...(not your signature)...so whoever reading your "Macrophotography by LordV" will know they can ask a question here:)

But it's great that you put: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=807056 in your signature, now anyone amazed by your awesome photos will go read it :)

Ah - there is actually a link already there in the Introduction.
Brian v.

[orionmystery]

Ah - there is actually a link already there in the Introduction.
Brian v.

Oh my bad :o:oops::p

[dicklaxt]

I,m staying abreast of your writings and it is all very informative and I'm beginning to see that macro results are knowing your way around the keyboard too............you are just a bundle of talent.I was born in the wrong decade and just can't think in these terms but I'm trying.

dick

[LordV]

I,m staying abreast of your writings and it is all very informative and I'm beginning to see that macro results are knowing your way around the keyboard too............you are just a bundle of talent.I was born in the wrong decade and just can't think in these terms but I'm trying.

dick
Thanks Dick - suspect our ages are not that far apart - I'm just inquisitive and like playing with things :)
Brian v.

[dicklaxt]

I don't know ,I'm pushing 74 and feeling it:lol:

dick

[LordV]

I don't know ,I'm pushing 74 and feeling it:lol:

dick
Ok you have a few years on me :)
Brian v.

[2731 drill]

Thanks for the info Brian,It will be very helpful , and you said you couldn't write LOL!!!

[jemanner]

I don't know ,I'm pushing 74 and feeling it:lol:

dick

Hey, now I don't feel so bad at 68! However, the arthritis is creeping up on me. The great thing, photography is a tremendous hobby at any age.

Question for the group.... How useful is an angle finder? Haven't been doing much macro lately, but when I did, on some occasions was sure wishing for something on the order of an angle finder.

[LordV]

Question for the group.... How useful is an angle finder? Haven't been doing much macro lately, but when I did, on some occasions was sure wishing for something on the order of an angle finder.

Seem to get mixed response on these with a few people finding them very useful and others not. Suspect if I was having trouble getting down low (or more pertinantly getting up again), I might think about one. Some comments that the much cheaper "seagull" brand via ebay is fine optically.
Brian v.

[Lwing]

a good alternative to the 430EX is the metz 48-af1, its full E-TTLII compatible, a bit cheaper(50€ less in europe), more powerful and more functions on the head.


Thanks, LordV for the macro thread. It is very informative and helpful for one getting started in macro work. I am still working through the material trying to absorb everything.

I know my camera and flash unit is old, but it is what I have to work with.

Can the Canon 540EZ be set up with a diffuser to work with a EOS 10D using a Canon 100 2.8 macro lens for F11. If not, what would be the best option on a tight budget?

[LordV]

Thanks, LordV for the macro thread. It is very informative and helpful for one getting started in macro work. I am still working through the material trying to absorb everything.

I know my camera and flash unit is old, but it is what I have to work with.

Can the Canon 540EZ be set up with a diffuser to work with a EOS 10D using a Canon 100 2.8 macro lens for F11. If not, what would be the best option on a tight budget?

I'm not familiar with either the camera or the flash but it seems the flash does have ttl capability, so it's worth trying with that. The flash also has manual capability so you could try using both the camera and flash in manual mode with the flash power setting set in the range 1/32 or 1/16th and see how they come out and adjust the manual flash time accordingly.
Brian V.

[dicklaxt]

I am just patiently waiting for the 430EX II to arrive.I have never used a flash other than the built in type.The flash power you speak of is confusing to me,,,,,,,,,,,,what is the 1/16th and 1/32nd in ref to?ie: 1/16th of what?

dick

[themadman]

Max power, it will all make sense once you get the flash, don't get ahead of yourself =)

Example 1/1 power (max power)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4069/4303543734_1dac6bd3e5_o.jpg

[LordV]

I am just patiently waiting for the 430EX II to arrive.I have never used a flash other than the built in type.The flash power you speak of is confusing to me,,,,,,,,,,,,what is the 1/16th and 1/32nd in ref to?ie: 1/16th of what?

dick

Dick - many flashes have a manual mode where you can set a fraction of full power out - tend to start at the lowest setting of 1/64th and go up to 1 (ie full power). Tends only to be used for macroshooting where you have no TTL capability or sometimes where the TTL preflash interferes either with the subject (eg dolichopid flies often startle with the pre-flash) or interferes with using the flash as a trigger for other flashes or where for example you want to to use liveview capabilities for focus but do not want the mirror to go down and up again for the pre-flash metering (which takes significant time).
Hope that makes sense.
Brian v.

[dicklaxt]

Yep oddly enough I did get most of that , LOL , thanks both

Brian that would be good subject matter for your writings,,,,,,The tricks of Macro Flash

dick

[LordV]

Just to say I have added another section to the main thread.
Just about running out of things to write about so if you have any ideas on bits I have not covered let me know here

Brian v.

[SkedAddled]

I just wanted to chime in to say that you've given me new hope, Brian,
and to wholeheartedly thank you for the effort & time you have put into
your superbly helpful thread.

My PowerShot S3IS wasn't doing it for me, and I also had lousy results with
my XTi/400D. I had all but given up on macro, but your pointer to the thread
in response to someone got me over there to check it out, and I'm awfully
glad I clicked!

Before, I was just frustrated & angry with my results.
Now, I have a reasonable, coherent & intelligent guide at my disposal, thanks
to your generosity. It's done an awful lot towards demystifying the process
for me, and is presented in a fashion that a layman such as myself can easily
understand and follow.




I occasionally came over the the Macro sharing section so that I could
say "Wow!" out loud to nobody and be floored by the talent on display.
But at this point, I've finally begun to see how it can be a reality in my
own photography, even after such consistent failure in the past.
So thanks for the information, thanks for the examples, thanks for
the encouragement, and thanks for your expertise.
Thanks to everyone else, too. I love seeing your photos.
I'm now subscribed to both threads, and will return to them often as
I attempt to figure out the weird & wonderful world of macro.

[LordV]

Thanks Craig - glad you found it useful.
Brian v.

[dicklaxt]

Brian when you fabbricated your add on attachment/diffuser it appears it has a slight conical shape and slightly larger in total area.When using this flash arrangement in Macro shooting is there a reason to disperse the light onto a larger area than the original flash unit does,by that I'm asking why go larger,why not maintain the basic flash unit size and better direct/concentrate the light onto the target area.

dick

[LordV]

Brian when you fabbricated your add on attachment/diffuser it appears it has a slight conical shape and slightly larger in total area.When using this flash arrangement in Macro shooting is there a reason to disperse the light onto a larger area than the original flash unit does,by that I'm asking why go larger,why not maintain the basic flash unit size and better direct/concentrate the light onto the target area.

dick

Yes it is purposely conical. One of the things about diffusing flash light is not just the diffusion material but also making the light source as large as possible so the light source/subject size ratio is large.This also the reason why they work better when close to the end of the lens disregarding possible lens shading if they are not. This similar to portrait photographers using those reversed flash/umbrella diffusers for shooting us.
Obviously as you go to higher magnifications the size becomes less important and you may need to use more of snoot to direct and concentrate the light- I do do this when shooting with my 10X microscope objective lens and sometimes when shooting at 5X with the MPE-65.

Brian v.

[dicklaxt]

What are you telling me here????? quote:so the light source/subject size ratio is large,why do you want this ratio to be large,is it not proportional ,a small subject and a small light coverage area would maintain the same ratio as a large subject and large coverage area with the same light intensity,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I stay confused.:),not trying to be argumentative but trying to grasp this.

dick

[dicklaxt]

Aha!!!!! or should I say DUH!!!!!Its starting to sink in, spread out the light by dispersing across a larger area and soften the light with diffusion material thereby eliminating shadows,who said old dogs couldn't learn new tricks.

dick

[LordV]

Aha!!!!! or should I say DUH!!!!!Its starting to sink in, spread out the light by dispersing across a larger area and soften the light with diffusion material thereby eliminating shadows,who said old dogs couldn't learn new tricks.

dick
Think you are got the idea. :)
Brian v.

[DQE]

also don't forget about flash recycle, sometimes making continuous shot impossible

If you get an external battery for the flash gun, such as the Quantum Turbo SC, it plugs directly into a high-voltage port on the side of Canon flashes, and enables a more rapid sustained recycle time. It attaches to your belt or a camera strap, and then attaches to your flash gun or macro flash gun at the high-voltage port on the side by way of a provided cable. This is the model I use - I'm sure other brands work but this is the only one I have experience with.

Without this external battery assist, I was concentrating too much on the subject and forgetting to allow enough time for flash recycle, thus ending up with photos without flash by accident. But with an external flash battery, I can usually shoot as fast as I wish without fear of missing the flash recycle time.

One has to watch how many consecutive flashes in a row you shoot - more than about 25-30 flashes in a row without pausing for a few minutes will overheat your flash heads and melt them. Yes - this is the voice of experience!

I hope this information is helpful. I'm sure most macro photographers don't use an external flash battery but I find it to be helpful, so I can shoot as rapidly as I wish, within limits.

[Warl0rd]

What are you telling me here????? quote:so the light source/subject size ratio is large,why do you want this ratio to be large,is it not proportional ,a small subject and a small light coverage area would maintain the same ratio as a large subject and large coverage area with the same light intensity,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I stay confused.:),not trying to be argumentative but trying to grasp this.

dickread: http://strobist.blogspot.com/2007/07/lighting-102-unit-21-apparent-light.html

[jkhalifa]

Hi Brian,

I guess this has turned into a bit of an advice thread rather than comments on the article. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post, and found it extremely helpful. I've also read/watched some of your tutorials on your blog, and would like to thank you for your valuable contributions to the inexperienced such as myself.

That said, I do have a question - as someone interested in macro but without a macro lens, which of the following would you recommend: Tamron 90mm, Canon MP-E 65mm, or Canon 100mm (I don't know if I'd go IS or non-IS with this one)? The MP-E looks neat to me because of the 5x magnification capability, though maybe this is a bit too much for a beginner to handle? My subjects will likely vary from bugs to flowers to liquids to coins (and so forth). My camera is the 7D. Your thoughts would be appreciated!

Justin

[LordV]

Hi Brian,

I guess this has turned into a bit of an advice thread rather than comments on the article. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post, and found it extremely helpful. I've also read/watched some of your tutorials on your blog, and would like to thank you for your valuable contributions to the inexperienced such as myself.

That said, I do have a question - as someone interested in macro but without a macro lens, which of the following would you recommend: Tamron 90mm, Canon MP-E 65mm, or Canon 100mm (I don't know if I'd go IS or non-IS with this one)? The MP-E looks neat to me because of the 5x magnification capability, though maybe this is a bit too much for a beginner to handle? My subjects will likely vary from bugs to flowers to liquids to coins (and so forth). My camera is the 7D. Your thoughts would be appreciated!

Justin
I'd stick with either the Tamron 90 or canon 100 as a starter macro lens. Then maybe get a set of extension tubes and then think about an MPE-65 :)
Brian v.

[spidermanrbryce2006]

Brilliantly done Brian!

[jkhalifa]

I'd stick with either the Tamron 90 or canon 100 as a starter macro lens. Then maybe get a set of extension tubes and then think about an MPE-65 :)
Brian v.

Thanks a bunch - I really appreciate it!

Justin

[goowa]

LordV, Brilliant and inspirational work!

I have some money burning a hole in my pocket and am debating either getting the Tamrom 90 or 180. I'm planning on mostly photographing plants/flowers but would like to keep my options open. If the price difference between these two lenses was not an issue, which would you recommend?

[LordV]

LordV, Brilliant and inspirational work!

I have some money burning a hole in my pocket and am debating either getting the Tamrom 90 or 180. I'm planning on mostly photographing plants/flowers but would like to keep my options open. If the price difference between these two lenses was not an issue, which would you recommend?

Think I'd still go for the Tamron 90 just much easier to handle.
The only advantage of the 180 would be a nicer bokeh in natural light shots.
Brian v.

[Lester Wareham]

Another advantage of a 180mm macro is a tighter perspective and I would say slightly easier to work with using a tripod. However for general work and as a first marco lens I agree a 90 or 100m lens is best.

[Warl0rd]

I would go with the 90mm

[goowa]

One other question concerning the flash bracket. I know I'm going to be using tripod 90% of the time. My hands just aren't that shake free! :-)

If you're going to mount to a tripod or monopod, do you have any ideas for a DIY bracket? I have a 580 and a cord, but with the camera mounted, I'm not sure what I would attach a flash bracket to. Any ideas from any of you that shoot with tripods?

Thanks in advance!

[LordV]

One other question concerning the flash bracket. I know I'm going to be using tripod 90% of the time. My hands just aren't that shake free! :-)

If you're going to mount to a tripod or monopod, do you have any ideas for a DIY bracket? I have a 580 and a cord, but with the camera mounted, I'm not sure what I would attach a flash bracket to. Any ideas from any of you that shoot with tripods?

Thanks in advance!

The tightening bolt on the bracket should have a female 1/4" thread in the back of it so you can attach to a tripod via that.
Brian v.

[Warl0rd]

depending on the lens you can buy a tripod collar, its much easier to work on the tripod that way, also the weight gets more evenly distributed.

[systemlayers]

I would like to use 2 flashes (I have 2 580EX and there is a flash cord one can buy that allows 2 identical canon flashes for ETTL).. any ideas on a flash bracket for 2 flashes?

[LordV]

I would like to use 2 flashes (I have 2 580EX and there is a flash cord one can buy that allows 2 identical canon flashes for ETTL).. any ideas on a flash bracket for 2 flashes?

The manfrotto 330B will handle two flashes.
Brian V.

[systemlayers]

Thanks very much i was looking all over for a solution but i guess i should have come to you first :)
Have you tried dual flash setups?
I notice you have been using the same coke can diffuser setup for a long time now with flash.
I'm considering trying an enlarging lens (like an 8-20x) for static objects, so i figure 2 flashes would def. help.

[LordV]

Thanks very much i was looking all over for a solution but i guess i should have come to you first :)
Have you tried dual flash setups?
I notice you have been using the same coke can diffuser setup for a long time now with flash.
I'm considering trying an enlarging lens (like an 8-20x) for static objects, so i figure 2 flashes would def. help.
No probs.

No I have enough trouble handling one flash hand held :). I rarely use tripod setups and suspect you may need one with the weight of 2 flashes :).
BTW not certain of the actual magnification you are going for but if it is above 5:1, the in lighting system seems to be to get a smallish hemispherical white plastic object, cut a hole in the top for the lens to go through and fire the light sources at the subject through the ball.
see pic in this post http://photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2825

[aaxxii]

Just wondering, what's a good way to keep the camera still when using 1:1 without a tripod (most bugs won't wait for you to take it out)?

I've been trying all sorts of shots with my 100 2.8 but ALL blurry. In the viewfinder it'll be perfect but right as I click the shutter the result is always blurry.

[LordV]

Just wondering, what's a good way to keep the camera still when using 1:1 without a tripod (most bugs won't wait for you to take it out)?

I've been trying all sorts of shots with my 100 2.8 but ALL blurry. In the viewfinder it'll be perfect but right as I click the shutter the result is always blurry.

Tricky one but for handheld shots at 1:1 with a 100mm lens in natural light you should be aiming for a shutter speed of 1/200th or higher so you'd need to either open the aperture or raise the ISo. Much easier with flash in M mode on the camera where you use the flash duration as the shutter speed. Other than that learn to brace yourself more- eg resting the camera or yourself against things or use a pole as I often do- grip it in your left hand along with a bit of camera.
Brian v.

[systemlayers]

Thanks for the link that's real helpful.
I finally pulled the trigger and bought an mp-e 65mm (only have a 100 2.8 macro).
I want it to be spring already though!

[canonee]

Thanks for the useful thread and response ...
How coukd I find the magnification ratio when using macro lense and extention tubes?
:)

[systemlayers]

Canonee refer to LordVs signature, in his macro tips thread he explains how to calculate magnification.

[canonee]

Thanks systemlayers and also thanks for LordV for his valuable available resources...

:)

[nomistwo21]

Thanks for the great resource

[Nelsondl]

Very nicely done article. Excellent explanations and examples.
I am a hand surgeon in San Francisco, developing a website on stoneflies (http://www.Stonefly.us). Stoneflies are an aquatic insect that is used for assessing water quality. I am trying to help the scientists with both identification (the paper keys are a nightmare, in my opinion) and to integrate the great, local knowledge of the fly fishing guides with the precise knowledge of the scientists. I see macro as a tool to help me achieve this. So, LordV, you are helping me help the planet. Cheers.

[Nelsondl]

I am sure a bunch of you Internet macro enthusiasts have seen these great pix: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=10767755

I have been in contact with the photographer, who said he took these shots with a Fuji FinePix S6500fd (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0607/06071302fujifilms6500fd.asp) and a DCR-250 Super Macro conversion lens (http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=10767755). He did not mention what actual primary lens he used.

The camera body in macro is not a key element, the lens is. I was rather surprised to see that he used this particular lens. I am not a great photo nut, but this seems like a simple snap on device, not really a lens at all. It sells for $56 on Amazon. It seems like it might be a good way to modify a video camera to get some macrovideo, but not great stills.

But I cannot argue with the great photos! Can anyone enlighten me?

[LordV]

I've seen some excellent macro shots with P&S cameras with Raynox adapters. I suspect the combo takes a bit of getting used to with extrmely small working distances. Only downside would be image quality on enlargements I suspect.

Brian V.

[Apollo.11]

I've been interested in macro and ran across your post. Thanks for sharing all that info.

[katrina82]

Hi,

love the macro page you've done , i've always wanted to do dew drops , and now think i might try it after your photo's.
could i also ask what you meant by "The last shot has been "pharted" in PS- I'll explain that later
is there a CombineZM software version for the MAC or something similar ?
Thanks very much for your write up , its really useful.
Katrina

[LordV]

Hi,

love the macro page you've done , i've always wanted to do dew drops , and now think i might try it after your photo's.
could i also ask what you meant by "The last shot has been "pharted" in PS- I'll explain that later
is there a CombineZM software version for the MAC or something similar ?
Thanks very much for your write up , its really useful.
Katrina
Hi Katrina,
Yes sorry have not got round to do a section on Pharting yet, but it's just heavily manipulating and image in photoshop with filters or inversion etc. Phart= PHoto ART.

AFAIK there is no easily useable free focus stacking software for the mac. I think you can run combine within a virtual PC on the MAC or you can use the trials of zerenestacker or helicon focus for the mac.
Brian V.

[katrina82]

Thanks for your reply Brian,
look forward to more macro shots.

Katrina

[hughredcanary]

I just wanted to ad my thanks to the effort and time you have put into such a well written and informative thread
from hugh a Nikon user

[LordV]

I just wanted to ad my thanks to the effort and time you have put into such a well written and informative thread
from hugh a Nikon user

Thanks Hugh - hopefully might have been some help :)
Brian v.

[AbPho]

Question regarding image quality as different apertures. Too small and you start loosing detail due to diffraction. When looking at what aperture one uses do you go by the aperture of the lens, or do you go by the effective aperture? IE: f/8 might be the sweet spot but once you add tubes do you have to open up the lens to retain the quality?

I read folks open up the MP-E as the increase the magnification. I was wondering if these two things are related.

[LordV]

Question regarding image quality as different apertures. Too small and you start loosing detail due to diffraction. When looking at what aperture one uses do you go by the aperture of the lens, or do you go by the effective aperture? IE: f/8 might be the sweet spot but once you add tubes do you have to open up the lens to retain the quality?

I read folks open up the MP-E as the increase the magnification. I was wondering if these two things are related.

Most of the apertures quoted here on the forum will be set apertures, it gets confusing when people start quoting apparent apertures.
In general as a starting point F11 set aperture at 1:1 gives a reasonable balance of DOF vs diffraction softening on a 1.6 crop camera, this equals F22 apparent aperture.

You can then use the formula F apparent = (1+M)* F set to shoot at higher magnifications to get the same diffraction balance.

So for example the apertures I tend to use with my MPE-65 going from 1:1 to 5:1 give an apperent aperture between F20 and F30.

Having said all that you need to decide what balance of detail vs DOF you want in your shots and for example whether you want to get involved in focus stacking for more DOF. Many macro shooters use apparent apertures up around F40 to F50 to get the balance of DOF vs detail in single shots that they prefer.

Brian V.

[Overread]

AbPho - also remember that different shooters will have different demands regarding sharpness and that things can get even more muddled as the camera body being used will also come into effect in determining where diffraction becomes a limit.

I think the best approach is to setup something like this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/24534478@N04/sets/72157623350445656/

and spend an hour or so taking really boring test photos - that way you can get a feel for the different levels of softness and sharpness and make your own choices. This is easier than in the field shots since it removes environmental factors (eg softness from wind/insect motion) from the equation and lets you compare the shots easily side by side.

[AbPho]

Thanks. On a crop I usually dial in f/8 or f/11. This is with the 100mm f/2.8 MACRO lens. I would say this is my comfort level for sharpness and depth of field.

[LV Moose]

With my 40D, most of my recent macro shooting has been with the 100mm 2.8L and a full set of Kenko tubes.

With that setup I find f/11 the best compromise between DOF and sharpness (that's for bug shots; flat objects like coins might be different). I tried larger f/ numbers the other day to gain DOF and found (once again) why I like f/11; the drop in sharpness was noticeable at f/14.

Maybe I'll try stacking one of these days when I feel ambitious :D

[r.morales]

Thanks , I reread again , not much since June . Great articles and advise -
After reading again - it looks like all I really gain if I get the ef 180 macro is working distance .
The mp-e 65 gives more Ampafication - harder to learn .
From what I gather , I would be better off looking at the ef 100 IS macro ?

[LordV]

Thanks , I reread again , not much since June . Great articles and advise -
After reading again - it looks like all I really gain if I get the ef 180 macro is working distance .
The mp-e 65 gives more Ampafication - harder to learn .
From what I gather , I would be better off looking at the ef 100 IS macro ?
Hi Yes the 180 gives more working distance and more background blur but is much harder to use than a 100mm macro lens.
Brian v.

[LV Moose]

..The mp-e 65 gives more Ampafication - harder to learn . From what I gather , I would be better off looking at the ef 100 IS macro ?

I love the 100 IS macro, but if I was interested in a lens just for macro work, I'd get the mp-e 65. I jumped on the 100 before I really knew much about macro shooting, and I already had a 70-200 f/4L to cover the 100mm range. But, as they say, hindsight is 20/20.

[Overread]

Remember however that the MPE starts at 1:1 and goes to 5:1. This means that it lacks the ability to go to 1:2, which whilst outside of "true" macro and more into close up is something that most people find they need for butterflies, moths, fungi, dragonflies etc.... Thus even with the MPE I think most macro shooters also feel the need for a lens that does a little less magnification (which is one reason I've hung onto my 70mm - similar working distances so no bonus there, but it small, light and easily slips into place to replace the MPE for when I need to take a shot of something larger than the MPE can frame.

[LV Moose]

Remember however that the MPE starts at 1:1 and goes to 5:1. This means that it lacks the ability to go to 1:2, which whilst outside of "true" macro and more into close up is something that most people find they need for butterflies, moths, fungi, dragonflies etc.... Thus even with the MPE I think most macro shooters also feel the need for a lens that does a little less magnification...

Good point. I do pull back frequently with my 100mm for larger critters that need less than 1:1.

[LordV]

Remember however that the MPE starts at 1:1 and goes to 5:1. This means that it lacks the ability to go to 1:2, which whilst outside of "true" macro and more into close up is something that most people find they need for butterflies, moths, fungi, dragonflies etc.... Thus even with the MPE I think most macro shooters also feel the need for a lens that does a little less magnification (which is one reason I've hung onto my 70mm - similar working distances so no bonus there, but it small, light and easily slips into place to replace the MPE for when I need to take a shot of something larger than the MPE can frame.

The main reason I also carry my old 2*TC with me - screw that on the front of the MPE-65 and it goes from about 2:1 mag to infinity focus. :)
Brian v.

[troypiggo]

The main reason I also carry my old 2*TC with me - screw that on the front of the MPE-65 and it goes from about 2:1 mag to infinity focus. :)
Brian v.

Whoah, whaaat?! I didn't know you could do that.... off to experiment :)

[LordV]

Whoah, whaaat?! I didn't know you could do that.... off to experiment :)

Troy - more info in this thread http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/927952
some example comparison shots here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=915848&highlight=2xTC

[r.morales]

The main reason I also carry my old 2*TC with me - screw that on the front of the MPE-65 and it goes from about 2:1 mag to infinity focus.
Brian v. --
Are you using an adapter , the rubber hose thing or is there a 58 mm 2X converter - name if there is -
Are there other converters that screw in / on besides the m42 [ 42 mm ] ?
Sorry about being a pain , but I wrote before about my knee and will probably still be for a week or 2 .
It's almost 2 pm here and no lens yet .

[LordV]

The main reason I also carry my old 2*TC with me - screw that on the front of the MPE-65 and it goes from about 2:1 mag to infinity focus.
Brian v. --
Are you using an adapter , the rubber hose thing or is there a 58 mm 2X converter - name if there is -
Are there other converters that screw in / on besides the m42 [ 42 mm ] ?
Sorry about being a pain , but I wrote before about my knee and will probably still be for a week or 2 .
It's almost 2 pm here and no lens yet .
Hi Roy,
I originally used a camping mat tube but in the end I superglued the retaining ring from a cheap 58mm ND filter to the back of the TC and so can just screw it on.
Brian v.

http://lordv.smugmug.com/Macrophotography/Artist-in-Residence-Hosting/IMG1325c/974052989_kojxw-L.jpg

[r.morales]

Thanks , I got a couple of m42 screw ons and a 3 x . they have not arrived yet .
I know the lens not being square will probably increase DOF also but still would rather have square / solid
My 7D / 70-200 came yesterday - so will be reading playing with it reading more .
It took me a couple of days to get the set-up on the XTI Probably 'bout the same or more for 7D .

[sandgroper333]

From one who is totally new to the world of DSLRs - Thank You, Thank You!!!! Your article/s was wonderful and answered so many queries that have been floating around in my head- and so practical!!!
Your shots are inspirational although perhaps a little daunting :)

I bought the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 two days ago and have been doing some playing out in my garden. I was happy enough with my outcome .......but now hhmmmmmmm!!!

What I really like about your article is that not only does it provide such good "know how", it also provides encouragement to newcomers such as myself - that with time and practise we will improve- and it certainly provides amazing performance exemplars.

Thanks

[LordV]

From one who is totally new to the world of DSLRs - Thank You, Thank You!!!! Your article/s was wonderful and answered so many queries that have been floating around in my head- and so practical!!!
Your shots are inspirational although perhaps a little daunting :)

I bought the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 two days ago and have been doing some playing out in my garden. I was happy enough with my outcome .......but now hhmmmmmmm!!!

What I really like about your article is that not only does it provide such good "know how", it also provides encouragement to newcomers such as myself - that with time and practise we will improve- and it certainly provides amazing performance exemplars.

Thanks

Hi,
Glad you found it helpful !
Brian v.

[Johnnyk_1]

^ ha i feel the same way as sandgroper. I just got my Canon XS and bought a canon 100mm 2.8, 2 days ago.

On the pic you posted above. Can you outline the len you have on the body, it looks like an extension tube, then canon lens, then another lens?

What's the advantage of an extension tube and that last lens you have in the pic above?

[LordV]

^ ha i feel the same way as sandgroper. I just got my Canon XS and bought a canon 100mm 2.8, 2 days ago.

On the pic you posted above. Can you outline the len you have on the body, it looks like an extension tube, then canon lens, then another lens?

What's the advantage of an extension tube and that last lens you have in the pic above?

The pic above is an oddity - it's actually a canon MPE-65 lens with a 2X tele-converter fitted on the front to actually reduce the minimum magnification the MPE-65 lens has and also give infinity focus. The lens by itself will not focus any further than 4" in front of the lens.
Brian v.

[Johnnyk_1]

^ thxs for the info. Can you please elobrate on the advantages on using MF instead of auto focus on a lens?

[LordV]

^ thxs for the info. Can you please elobrate on the advantages on using MF instead of auto focus on a lens?

This is just a result mainly of the narrow DOF you get when shooting macro plus in some situations there would not be enough natural light to get AF to work anyway plus macro AF is often rather slow.
When AF does work it may not actually focus on the subject part that you want in focus so it's normally easier and faster when shooting at 1:1 or higher to use manual focus.
One last reason is that you often want to shoot at a particular magnification and it is easier to set the magnification (focus) you want on the lens and then focus by moving the camera.
Should add the MPE-65 lens is manual focus only anyway.

At magnifications of 0.5:1 or lower the DOF and light will obviously be better and AF may then work well.
Brian v.

[r.morales]

Auto focus works by differences in contrast in focus area . The less light there is , the more grays or whites or blacks . The camera wants to focus on the difference between black and white but without enough light it just sees shades of black ,white or grays and either starts hunting or just ignores you .
It is not all that black and white , it's colors to .
This is why a lot of people focus on either eyes or eye brows . the tip of nose or the bridge of nose just does not had enough contrast to focus quickly , if at all .
Tonight after sunset , go outside and try to focus on the car door . If it does , estimate time it took . now move to the crack where door meets fender . It will focus fast there - same amount of light but better contrast . Try this at f16 and then f8 and so on till it works .
By the way , the best way to learn or check what you think is to try to explain it to some one else .

[troypiggo]

Auto focus works by differences in contrast in focus area . The less light there is , the more grays or whites or blacks . The camera wants to focus on the difference between black and white but without enough light it just sees shades of black ,white or grays and either starts hunting or just ignores you .
It is not all that black and white , it's colors to .
This is why a lot of people focus on either eyes or eye brows . the tip of nose or the bridge of nose just does not had enough contrast to focus quickly , if at all .
Tonight after sunset , go outside and try to focus on the car door . If it does , estimate time it took . now move to the crack where door meets fender . It will focus fast there - same amount of light but better contrast . Try this at f16 and then f8 and so on till it works .
By the way , the best way to learn or check what you think is to try to explain it to some one else .

I'm not really disagreeing with any of the technical aspects of the above, but I think that the reason photographers focus on the eyes is that it makes a much more appealing photo. Photos of people, and insects/spiders etc for that matter since this is the macro section, look much better when the eyes are in focus. They're not really trying to find the most "constrasty" part of the subject. If they were, I'm sure they could find a bigger target with the clothes or hair etc.

Sorry for the nitpick.

[r.morales]

You could also add the eyes because of the DOF- the eyes are kind of centered .
Don't be Sorry for the nitpick - I am way to old to think I know everything or I am right all the time .
I try to explain things and if wrong - I want to know it . If explained wrong , then I don't understand or phased wrong -either way I want to know .

[Johnnyk_1]

Just want to make sure i understand this correctly,

With a 50mm 1.8 non macro lens, i can not get as close to the subject as a 50mm 1.8 macro lens? Meaning with a 50mm non macro the lens would focus at the subject at 4 ft away but if you had a 50mm macro lens u can focus on the subject at 2ft away? and the advantage of this that the closer u get the more detail u get in your subject?

and the addition of extension tubes on a macro allows you to get even closer to the subject?