How about all you "Macro Pros" giving some Tips?

[Ballen Photo]

How about it? I know you Macro Guys n Gals are out there, I've seen some of your work. :D
How about some basic "Do's" and "Dont's" for the macro illiterate among us? (Me):oops:
Things like;
How to take a decent macro photo.
DOF and macro.
Do I need a tripod?
Macro lighting Tips?
Macro "Budget" lighting Tips? ;)
Why would I want a bellows set?
How do I USE my bellows properly? :rolleyes:
Other macro accessories that might help?
-Bruce


**EDIT Tip #1 From EF Lens FAQ**
-=Choosing the Right Macro Lens for Your Needs=- (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=779256&postcount=2)

[Alan B]

I have one tip(well what i do anyway).

With my Canon 100mm f2.8 and my 20D.

I set the lens on MF(manual focus) and have the fucusing point in the middle square(when looking through the view finder).Then while looking down the view finder i see how far i want to be from the subject,then half press the shutter release button.Then move my body slow'ly in or out(or turn the focusing ring) until the centre square flashes red and bleeps.Which is telling me that the point on the subject is in "prime" focus.

I've allways done my macro photography in that way.It may be right or it may be the wrong thing to do,but it works very well for me.

Oh and IMO this is a good informative thread :cool: (i'd like to learn loads more about macro photography,so others tips would be great)

[Bald Eagle]

I am by no means an expert at Macro, but, if what I do can help others, great. When shooting Macro, first I try to always use a Tripod, any little movement at such close range, means one thing, BLURRY. I prefer to shoot using my Tv mode with usually a short exposure, maybe 3 to 5 seconds depending on the light available. Natural light works better for me. i use a remote cable release to minimize any jarring from my end. When possible i use ISO of 100, This is the hardest part, I try make the shot interesting, such as surrounding leaves or color, and I take several shots of each subject, usually from different angles when possible. On insect Macros, I try to make sure the eyes are in perfect focus. Hope this helps.

[Roach711]

This is the setup I've been using lately with my 20D & Canon 100 macro:

In addition to Alan's tips:

Camera on manual. Aperture at f22 for great depth of field. Shutter at 160 to minimize camera shake. ISO at 200 or 400 (400 looks pretty good on the 20D). Flash on the hotshoe (but even better on a bracket that puts the flash out over the subject) in E-TTL mode with a diffuser such as the Omnibounce or Lightsphere II.

The flash adjusts output (macro fill flash?) to correctly expose the pic. The diffuser makes the flash into a larger, diffuse light source to minimize and soften shadows. If you shoot a lot bring spare batteries for the flash since this approach tends to drain them faster than normal.

Another member suggested this setup and it works very well!

[foxbat]

Here's how I do it, others may disagree:

For up to 1:1 macro shots I'll use my Sigma 105mm lens, manual focus. The Sigma has magnification ratios written on the lens barrel so you can preset before you set up the shot. I do that. 1:1 or thereabouts demands a minimum of f/11 and normally I'm somewhere around f/16. You'll learn from experience what is right for what size subject at what magnification. Digital is free, so don't hold back!

I hate noise as it destroys fine detail so I always use ISO 100. Unless the sun is blazing down I am looking at shutter speeds waaay too slow to hand hold so I use a tripod ALWAYS if I can, backing off to a monopod if the terrain isn't good. Dust on your sensor will be visible at macro apertures so keep it clean.

Now that I have an ETTL macro ring flash (Sigma EM-140) I always use it and it has been a revelation for me. No matter what f-stop/ISO I select the flash means that I can get the x-sync shutter speed (1/200s on the 300D). If I had to give a drawback to the ring-flash it is that it's in the way if you try to peer over the camera to find where the subject has just crawled off to!

I focus in the same way that others have described here. Having preset the magnification I want I move my kit until the subject is in focus.

I have recently added 68mm of extension to the Sigma 105mm to get roughly 2:1 magnification out of the 105mm lens. It works well but is MUCH harder to manage. DOF is even narrower, working distance is down by about 50% (unscientific guess) and you simply cannot locate subjects with the viewfinder alone as it shows an area 20mm or so wide at f/2.8!. The results are worth it though.

[Roach711]

DOF Preview Button

Another thing that I *usually* remember to do is to press my camera's DOF preview button not only to see how deep the DOF (Depth Of Field) is but also to see what the background will look like in the final shot. When you're shooting dragon fly sized stuff stopped down the background may look nice and out-of-focus through the viewfinder but when you take the shot it's actually a lot sharper. Sometimes I'll press-and-hold the DOF preview button then adjust the aperture (in AV Mode) with the main dial to dial in the background blur I want.

Tripods

I seldom use a tripod just because the critters I usually photograph aren't interested in becoming world-famous and won't hold still. For flowers and such a tripod is definitely the way to go. I don't use mine much, but when I need it I *really* need it.

[jfrancho]

DOFMaster Depth of field Online Calculator (http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html). I know I've posting this link a lot, but it is that useful. Can also be a shocker when working at extreme distances, such as with macros.

[Ballen Photo]

Now here is something that is important to learn, and not many will mention it.
Everyone will preach "details" in the world of macro, and yes, that is good!
But you have to learn both ends in macro.

Without good composition and good lighting, your macros usually will lack that "punch" that everyone seeks out.
Many will think this to be the odd way and especially in macro, but try shooting wide open for a change and use selective focusing methods.
Selective focus will help you determine which or what part is the most important area within your composition.
When that is determined, shoot it wide open to see what is achieved and then start adjusting your settings for more depth ........... if you wish too. You may not want to! You may like what you see initially and leave it at that.
Everything in the world of macro does not have to hold maximum DOF unless you are after the documentry/scientific type shots.

Shooting wide open, using selective focusing methods, has lead me to much better compositions. Sounds a bit odd, but oh so true!

Lighting?
I will often use the styrofoam paper plates for diffusors or reflectors.
They are cheap, and very useful when being held by a Wimberly Plamp.
Another piece of equipment I use is a mirror, for getting the light in those "hard to light, hard to reach" areas.
Available light is much more appealing, (in my opinion), and I will use flash only when I have to.
Thanks for taking the time to post this alternate view on macro Mike. :D
The things you say here make a lot of sense. ;)
Just looked at your portfolio, VERY impressive. Thanks again.
-Bruce

[rockyc2]

I sure ain't no *Pro*, but I get great results. I have the 550EX Flash mounted on a straight Flash Bracket which puts the Flash to the side of my 10D. I also use an off Camera Shoe Cord II. I also have the Flash diffuser down on the Flash head. I use an ISO of 400@f/16@1/200s. I have the flash FEC set at +2/3. I shoot in AV mode and AF. I don't even mess with manual focus.:D OH! I'm using my *Great* Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro Lens.:D No Tripod. All handheld.:D
Rocky

[Ballen Photo]

I sure ain't no *Pro*, but I get great results.
Yes you DO get good results Rocky, and NO, I just put that in the title to get folks attention so they will post their tips in here. You dont need to be a PRO to post here. This is for ANYBODY that's interested in macro from newbies up. ;)
Your idea of using a bracket to mount the flash off to the side via an off shoe cable is an EXCELLENT idea! Thanks. :D
-Bruce

[rockyc2]

Yes you DO get good results Rocky, and NO, I just put that in the title to get folks attention so they will post their tips in here. You dont need to be a PRO to post here. This is for ANYBODY that's interested in macro from newbies up. ;)
Your idea of using a bracket to mount the flash off to the side via an off shoe cable is an EXCELLENT idea! Thanks. :D
-Bruce

Thanks, Bruce. Yep, that flash bracket and the cable really works great. I only paid about $8.00 for the bracket from B&H.
Rocky

[Ballen Photo]

Thanks, Bruce. Yep, that flash bracket and the cable really works great. I only paid about $8.00 for the bracket from B&H.
I've got an old Stroboframe bracket that I paid quite a bit more for from a local camera store, with an off camera cord, and I had thought about trying it for macro, and now I hear from you that it works great, so that settles it. I'll have to give it a try. Thanks again. :D
-Bruce

[rockyc2]

I've got an old Stroboframe bracket that I paid quite a bit more for from a local camera store, with an off camera cord, and I had thought about trying it for macro, and now I hear from you that it works great, so that settles it. I'll have to give it a try. Thanks again. :D
-Bruce
Giver Hell, Bruce.:D :D I would sure like to see your shots.
Rocky

[Bald Eagle]

Here's another small tip, Learn how to find these bugs, I have trained my eyes to look for things that dont look just right, and focus on them. You'd be amazed what you find under your very nose.

[adauria]

Can one of the macro experts please explain (for a total newb) what is meant by "reverting" the lens (or is it "reversing")??

Also, do you really need a special lense to dabble in macro, or could I get started with the Rebel XT kit lens or a nifty 50?

Thanks!

-Andrew

[Ballen Photo]

Can one of the macro experts please explain (for a total newb) what is meant by "reverting" the lens (or is it "reversing")??

Hello Andrew, It's actually "REVERSING" the lens, and there are special adapter rings you can buy that will mount onto the camera body, and the other side of the adpter will have a set of threads (Threads are available in various different sizes to fit different size lens filter threads.) The idea is to mount a lens (Usually a 50mm) backwards on the camera body, and some will mount the backwards lens onto the end of another lens that is mounted right way around.
A reversed lens will focus extremely close, but all settings will need to be handled manually, including focus.
There are several different options for shooting true macro.

Extension rings enable a standard lens to focus much closer than it normally would.

You could pick a macro lens that is designed to focus extremely close from the factory.

Reversing the lens is of course one of the options.

If you want to get into extreme macro of static objects, you might want to have a look at this thread, http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=683965#post683965

I hope this has answered some of your questions. ;)
-Bruce

[adauria]

Very much so! Thank you!

-Andrew

[rockyc2]

Very much so! Thank you!

-Andrew
Andrew, you can couple 2 lens like I have in the below picture. Like Bruce said, you can really get close doing it this way. Here I have my cheap Sigma 28-80 lens mounted on the camera, with another cheap lens the Kalimar 50 f/1.7 lens mounted face to face together. You need a cheap *lens coupler* in what ever size you need. B&H and other companies sell these very cheap.
http://www.pbase.com/rockyc2/image/39605486.jpg
Rocky

[GyRob]

you need an adepter to revers the lens it lets you get closer, i take mine with just a closeup filter on my 85mm lens when i use the mk2 ,not as good as a true macro but im pleased with what i get.
my tip here is take lots of shots moreso if its flying dont waite to get it right take the shot then try and make it right if it gives you another chance.
Rob.

[martin-images]

Hers my tip, pics can be viewed here
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=89248

Watch insects as they fly around a plant collecting nectare and see where they land from stem to stem a pattern usally occurs, now prefocus on a stem you think they will fly to, be patient and sooner or later a chance will arrive to catch them in flight, this is what i do cause ive found it nearly impossiable to focus on a moving subject in flight with out prefocus
Martin
www.digital-monochrome.com

[Ballen Photo]

Hers my tip, pics can be viewed here
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=89248 From the look of those photos, I'd say this is a good tip. ;)
-Bruce

[Roach711]

I've never actually reversed a lense but as I understand it you get an adapter that mounts to the front of the lens and attach it backward.

Many normal lenses have a macro function but most don't capture 1 to 1 (lifesize). You need a true macro lens for that. You can also get pretty good results with extension tubes and macro screw-on lenses but for the best result you need a dedicated macro lens. The Canon 2.8 100 macro is regarded as "L" quality and isn't *that* expensive (relatively speaking). It also works well as a 100mm prime lens.

[Leorooster]

Can one of the macro experts please explain (for a total newb) what is meant by "reverting" the lens (or is it "reversing")??


-Andrew

See the link below:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=75127

[G3owner]

A ring flash? Here's my own, cheap flash for my G3. I do not remember where I saw a description of how to make this but the idea is not mine. This works well with the G3 I suppose it can be applied to any camera... Cost is just a few cents and a few minutes of work ;)

1. Take some white, simple plastic jar (i used a sour-cream jar)
2. Remove all labels and colours from it
3. Cut a hole suitable for your lens (make it tight)
4. Apply it on the outer part of your lens
5. Cover the flash with a piece of white paper

The examples below are taken using that piece of equipment. The frog is a 6 cm high ceramic frog. The first picture is with the built in flash only, and the second with the 'ring flash' mounted. The flower bud is also with the 'ring flash'....

G3owner

[JoseC]

Click on the link here after and you'll find one of my macro
setups (including picture of it).
Also, I just found yesterday that a simple wood pole worked
as well as the monopod.
That is very good because you can use the pole when walking and
then no need to attach to take the picture :) it's very fast, but
you have to find the "hand technique" to hold the camera steady
against the pole.
Rgds
Jose

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=97738

[Benedictine]

Sorry images rather big-new to this uploading game! Is this better?

[Bald Eagle]

If I could only pick one it would be EXTENSION TUBES,without a doubt, the best macro tool I have.

[LordV]

Think the official defintion is shots taken at 1:1 or more. I take a more relaxed approach at any shot that shows more detail than you can see with the naked eye.
Brian V.

[LordV]

I know I'm only a Newbe here, but I have been getting some good results this Summer.
I was requested to do some macro tips on the photo site Flickr- you can find them here. You can of course see some of the results in my photosets on flickr (link in sig)
http://www.flickr.com/groups/mimicry/discuss/66514/

Brian V.

[Edwin Bont]

For me, the most important thing in macro is the light.
I always use a small softbox on my flash.
Or when i shoot insects indoors, in an improvised studio, i use reflectors too.
Setup (do'nt laugh): http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign2/Macro/opstelling.jpg
Result: http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign2/Macro/fairy16.jpg

And when i use my stacked lenses setup (100mm macro+ reversed 50mm) i use a cardboard ring reflector (r).
http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign/ringflitser2.jpg
Samples: http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign/Macro/zweef1.jpg
http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign2/Macro/spring2.jpg
http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign/Macro/torretje1.jpg

[LordV]

For me, the most important thing in macro is the light.
I always use a small softbox on my flash.
Or when i shoot insects indoors, in an improvised studio, i use reflectors too.
Setup (do'nt laugh): http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign2/Macro/opstelling.jpg
Result: http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign2/Macro/fairy16.jpg

And when i use my stacked lenses setup (100mm macro+ reversed 50mm) i use a cardboard ring reflector (r).
http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign/ringflitser2.jpg
Samples: http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign/Macro/zweef1.jpg
http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign2/Macro/spring2.jpg
http://members.lycos.nl/eddysign/Macro/torretje1.jpg
Excellent improvisation there- I like it.- results in amazing shots too!
Brian V.

[G3owner]

Don't know - yet. I will give it a try myself as I just bought a 350D for myself ;) I'm still waiting for the EF 100 mm macro lens, but as soon as I have it I will try to develop some low-cost version for it...

Bamce

In this thread you will find a picture of another money-saving macro diffuser setup...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=119507

Bamce

[tce5]

Hi there
I'm a new member but have been taking macro shots for a few years now. Take a look at my work at http://tanyaevans.photium.com
If you like this work then this is how I usually create the results:

1. Set your camera up on a tripod with a shutter release cable on the camera
2. Use reflectors if you have them - if not tin foil works wonders
3. Get good flowers, I like orange gerberas
4. Spray water onto the flower head - the droplets give fantastic results
5. A good macro lens like 100mm f/2.8 is a godsend
6. Good lighting and patience
You will take loads of photos before you get the shot you really like.
Good luck
Tanya

[Hogster]

This trick was given to my by a 75 year old lady in my photo club. When working with insects, catch them first, put them into your refrigerator (don't get them mixed up with the leftovers) and the cool temperature will put them to sleep, take them out and place them on your selected scene, then you will have approximately 2 minuets to shoot before they wake up and hop away!

[racketman]

handy link explaining all the aids to macro photography:

http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/buyersguide/fullbuyersguide.cfm?buyersguideid=12

[LordV]

Thought I'd knock up an example of this as there are always a few questions about it.
Focus stacking is simply used to increase the DOF in a picture which can be a major problem in taking macro shots. It is done by taking a series of picures of the subject from the same point of view but at different focus depths covering the area you want in focus. This is achieved either by moving the camera or by using the focus ring. It is best done on a tripod but can be done handholding as long as the FOV is reasonably consistent.
I use the freeware Programme combinez5 to do this available from here
http://www.hadleyweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/CZ5/combinez5.htm
First a series of three pics to be stacked- notice how the focus point is slighlty different in each shot- I tend to start with the nearest point and move in.

Pic 1
http://static.flickr.com/22/90115248_87cefd93f7_o.jpg


Pic2
http://static.flickr.com/31/90115249_e372aa7442_o.jpg

Pic3
http://static.flickr.com/13/90115250_c561f9a27c_o.jpg

It is important you do not do any cropping before focus stacking as the programme will only accept pics of equal size.

Now the hard bit :D

Run combinez5 and open up the file load dialogue

and choose the pics to be stacked

http://static.flickr.com/15/90115251_cd4e2baa14_o.jpg

Once loaded Simply tell it to stack them

http://static.flickr.com/31/90115252_5b2108815f_o.jpg

It then works away re-aligning, colour and contrast matching and resizing, picks the in Focus bits apparently on a pixel by pixel basis and hopefully will produce a clean focus stacked image.

http://static.flickr.com/43/90115253_4253898a5f_o.jpg

Producing the Final focus stacked image.


http://static.flickr.com/17/90116526_a28f654d3f_o.jpg

It's just then a matter of saving the file using the Save Frame/Picture As dialogue.
Sometimes if the pictures were not that well aligned you will get odd effects around the borders which obviously need cropping.

Brian V.

[Ballen Photo]

Thought I'd knock up an example of this as there are always a few questions about it.

EXCELLENT demonstration Brian, Thank You for posting this. :D
-Bruce

[Roach711]

I would imagine that this same effect could be created in Photoshop by taking multiple shots with different focus points, then stacking them as layers and using layer masks, paint out the unfocused bits. The shots *would* have to be very well registered making a tripod almost mandatory.

This technique is pure genius!

[stetner]

DOF Preview Button

Another thing that I *usually* remember to do is to press my camera's DOF preview button

Roach711, I find that the image is so dark when I use the DOF preview that I can rarely make out much. In good light with an f 1.8 lens it is OK, but with something like my Tamron 90mm f2.8 lens, if I stop down more than about f8 it is too dark to see what is in focus or not.....

I have the 20D as well, and thought it was a function of the view finder. Can you really tell your DOF if you are shooting macro at f16 say?

Doug

[Salticid]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned John Shaw's "Closeups in Nature". It's outstanding. He covers every possible way to increase magnification. He even makes flash look natural. But the most important advice he gives is in the Forward. It's something fundamental that I haven't seen in the other nature photography books I've been going through:

"In terms of locating subject matter and "working" it in the field, my best advice is to learn as much as you can about the natural world. I've said it before, but it still holds true: To be a better nature photographer, you must first become a better naturalist."

I don't yet have anything to contribute about photography--but maybe I can help a bit on the "become a better naturalist" part, especially for tiny critters.


Identification:
----------------
Why bother, it's the photo that counts. Well... It's disconcerting and a distraction from the image to find a beautiful photo of a syrphid fly--labeled as a bee. The photographer cared so little about his subject that he didn't bother to learn the equivalent of how to tell a dog from a pony.

An ID is the handle you need to find out more. Don't worry about the species--that's difficult for most invertebrates. Start at the top and work down: Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species. (Botanists are a tad strange, and use Division instead of Phylum.) It's usually easy to ID an invertebrate to Order (e.g. fly, grasshopper, beetle) though you need to be careful about mimicry. With a key, a good hand lens and a corpse, you can generally get to Family if you enjoy the process, but the correct Order is a fine start.

Appearance isn't the only thing useful for ID--you might also keep track of location, habitat, time of year and day (hooray for exif!), behavior (strong or weak flier? hover or perch?) and even weather, esp. temperature. If you don't have time to write a few notes, take some wider photos of the area to show the kind of vegetation (forest? roadside? meadow? bog?) as a nudge to your memory later.

"The Practical Entomologist" by Rick Imes is a great beginning insect book. It covers each Order, with what sets it apart from the others, and includes collecting and rearing, some interesting experiments to try, and a bit of ecology. To get to Family, the Peterson guide "A Field Guide to Insects" by White and Borror is good. You need to use the keys though--if you only look at the pictures you'll either be frustrated or misled.

For spiders, the Little Golden Book "Spiders and their Kin" by Levy is the only reliable beginner's guide. It will get you to family without much fuss--spider ID to that level is by eye arrangement and web type. Beyond that it's often a matter of dissection and a microscope.


Behavior:
-----------
Names are all well and good, but the interesting bit is what they -do-. How they live and grow, who they meet and eat. Try a few of these for hints about what to watch for:

"Broadsides from Other Orders" by Sue Hubbell
"Stokes Guide to Observing Insect Lives" by Donald and Lillian Stokes
"Wasp Farm" by Howard Ensign Evans
"Pleasures of Entomology" by Howard Ensign Evans
"Spineless Wonders" by Richard Coniff
"In the Company of Mushrooms" by Elio Schaechter
"Wily Violets and Underground Orchids" by Peter Bernhardt
"The Trees in My Forest" by Bernd Heinrich

For an overview of how it all fits together, Edward O. Wilson's "Diversity of Life" can't be beat. His autobiography, "Naturalist", is also excellent.


Finding subjects:
----------------------
If you have even a small city yard, you can have oodles of subjects at your doorstep--no driving or gear lugging. Simply plant local native plants. A native plant typically has close relationships with 50 or more other species, (other plants, fungi, insects, bacteria, vertebrates), an exotic only about 5. Convert some of your lawn into a habitat, and be amazed from year to year as new creepy crawlies discover your oasis, and new birds come to feed on the creepy crawlies. (You'll also spend less time mowing / watering / fertilizing, because once established, well chosen native plants need little care.)

If you only have space for one plant patch, try goldenrod. Canadian goldenrod (Solidago canadensis) in an Illinois prairie remnant was found to attract 50 bees, 78 wasps, 60 flies, 4 butterflies, 4 moths, 14 beetles, and 3 bugs just to the flowers, thus not counting spiders, foliage eaters, sap suckers, and root nibblers.

To find help with plant choices, look for your state or region's Native Plant Society. Some of the members will be gardeners and/or photographers. (Slide shows are a popular activity, and some chapters keep a slide library for lending out to schools.) Many or most NPSs have email discussion lists, so you can get good advice about what to plant even if you can't go to meetings. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation <http://www.xerces.org/> is also a valuable resource.

Build some micro-habitats, too. In forested/thickety areas, shaded stumps and logs are a magnet for fungi, ants, beetles, solitary bees and wasps, and all who feed upon them. Brush piles and rock piles make good homes. A small pond can be a gold mine. My pondlet is just a kiddie pool with a pond liner and a small pump. A rocky bog takes up about a third of it. It's not photogenic as a whole, mostly due to the attentions of Raffles, 'my' raccoon, who keeps rearranging it. But the protist, plant, bug and bird activity it generates is wonderful. (Alas, that's also why it keeps Raffles amused.)

It should go without saying, but I've learned it doesn't: If you want invertebrate photographic subject matter on your doorstep, you can't use pesticides. All pesticides kill far more species than the 'pests'. Think of 'pests' as a resource instead. I adore aphids: they're essential fodder for ladybugs and their alligator offspring, bright orange syrphid fly larvae, teensy black wasps, lacewings, warblers and vireos... Once you've tuned in, a plant description of 'pest-resistant' shouts out 'boring'!


Become a practicing scientist:
---------------------------------
Biology, like astronomy, is a subject where amateurs can still do original and valuable work. Educate your eyes and take careful notes, and you have a chance to make some important contributions. If you can also document your discoveries with great photographs, that's a big bonus. Even in North America there are still invertebrate species to be discovered and described, and many or most species that do have names are only known by appearance--little or nothing is known about how they live. Do they overwinter as eggs, larvae or adults? Who does that parasitoid wasp prey on? Who does that caterpillar become when it grows up? Who pollinates that wildflower--bee? fly? moth? It could be up to you to find out.

[LordV]

Thought it worth posting this reply here.
I do sometimes scare them off but have just got into a few habits when approaching bugs.
1. Make sure you are not blocking the sunlight on them
2. Keep low (if possible at the same level or lower than the bug)
3. Approach slowly taking pics as you go ( at least you end up with something if they do fly off)
4. Luck and time :)- often find if the bug is occupied doing something - cleaning, feeding, mating, blowing bubbles they take almost no notice of you, but if they are just sunbathing they can be a bit jittery.
5. The smaller the bug often the less notice they take of you.
6. If you do scare them off just wait a while- they will often come back.
7. Stand/sit near a popular plant or flower and wait for them to come to you- they seem to regard you as part of the scenery if you are there when they arrive.
8. Although it's harder to take pics of them, they are less jittery if it's slightly windy- many times I've actually managed to hold the leaf the bug was on to stabilise it when it's been windy.
Brian V.

[dpastern]

Thanks for sharing those tips Brian :) I'll reiterate what some others have said - invest in a good dedicated Macro lense, 100mm or 150mm preferably. Give yourself as much working distance as possible, to both avoid scaring the bug, and two, blocking light.

Dave

[dpastern]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned John Shaw's "Closeups in Nature". It's outstanding. He covers every possible way to increase magnification. He even makes flash look natural. But the most important advice he gives is in the Forward. It's something fundamental that I haven't seen in the other nature photography books I've been going through:

"In terms of locating subject matter and "working" it in the field, my best advice is to learn as much as you can about the natural world. I've said it before, but it still holds true: To be a better nature photographer, you must first become a better naturalist."

I'll 2nd this. Get Shaw's book, it's a gem. I'm reading through it now. I'm also reading through amphoto's "Digital Nature Photography closeup" by Jon Cox. It's not as good as the Shaw book, but does cover it from a digital viewpoint. Both of them make good reading and compliment each other.

In all honesty, any of the Shaw books are worthwhile, I own 2, and will be purchasing a 3rd one. Seriously, get the close up book :)

Dave

[BigAl-SA]

I've just spent about 1/2 hour trying to find this thread of folks macro setups as I'm looking for a new flash mount, so I've decided to post links to some threads which contain useful info, but are buried.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142566

This thread has some pics of HiddenForms homemade flash bracket
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=154104&page=2


Trying to keep a moving bug in focus (unfortunately, not too many replies here)
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=146093

Some thoughts from Brian V (LordV) on manual focussing at high magnification
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=146646

Using a tripod collar for a flash bracket mount (*merged*)
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142566

Full frame sensors vs crop sensors for macro
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=147105
Also a fairly heated debate here:
http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/forum/showthread.php?t=1497

Cheap Kenko tubes
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141794

Not sure how useful this is, as it's one of mine, but a method of measuring bugs.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=152369


Best way to handhold while shooting - has a pic of Brian V (LordV) and his famous beanpole, which may or may not be linked in this thread
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142217


Sorry if I've missed other useful links, but I had to wade back through 19 pages to find the first link :(

[cgratti]

Found this page, seems worth the look just for the use of homemade diffusers. This guy uses bubble wrap...

http://home.comcast.net/~dougsmit/bounceflashtoys.html

[jack lumber]

Hogster wrote


This trick was given to my by a 75 year old lady in my photo club. When working with insects, catch them first, put them into your refrigerator (don't get them mixed up with the leftovers) and the cool temperature will put them to sleep, take them out and place them on your selected scene, then you will have approximately 2 minuets to shoot before they wake up and hop away!
__________________
If you are handling butterflies or moths,use a pair of tweezers,NOT your fingers.
The oils in are skin can damage their wings.

[dpastern]

Hogster wrote


This trick was given to my by a 75 year old lady in my photo club. When working with insects, catch them first, put them into your refrigerator (don't get them mixed up with the leftovers) and the cool temperature will put them to sleep, take them out and place them on your selected scene, then you will have approximately 2 minuets to shoot before they wake up and hop away!
__________________
If you are handling butterflies or moths,use a pair of tweezers,NOT your fingers.
The oils in are skin can damage their wings.

I'd never recommend doing this, the chances of killing your insect are high. As Arthur Morris (and countless others would say), you should never interfere with what you are trying to photograph. If you have to do that, you shouldn't take the image.

Dave

[Leorooster]

I'd never recommend doing this, the chances of killing your insect are high. As Arthur Morris (and countless others would say), you should never interfere with what you are trying to photograph. If you have to do that, you shouldn't take the image.

Dave

Agree 100%! If you need to do that to take good pics, then I think you probably need some more practice.

[Dalantech]

I don't know about the "pro" part -and I'm sure many of you will question it after you learn how I shoot ;)

Since I want to use the flash for fill, and I frequently have to deal with a little wind, I set my camera to shutter priority 1/250 of a second (maximum normal flash sync speed for the 20D). I set my ISO to 200 (low noise and I gain a stop), and set the camera's exposure compensation to -2/3 (colors saturate and I don't have to worry about blowing the highlights). For the most part I don't care about the aperture since depth of field is going to be low no matter what Fstop I use. I set the flash (MT-24) anywhere from -2 to -3 depending on how reflective the subject is (about -2 for dragonflies, -3 for damselflies).

If I'm shooting a subject that's against a shallow background, or the light is very poor, then I'll go full manual F11 to F16, 1/250, and ISO 100 since I can use the flash to bring out the background.

I don't use a tripod -IMHO they are useless when I'm chasing a moving target, and a tripod can't stop the wind from moving the subject. So I either shoot hand held or with a BushHawk camera mount. The BushHawk helps me keep everything steady and offers about the same stability as a monopod -but much faster to recompose when the subject moves.

I don't allow myself to crop images -so I have to spend some time learning about my subject's behavior so I can get close. Here are some examples of what can be done with a little patience. All photos either hand held or with a BushHawk camera mount (no tripod). Minimal post processing and no cropping.

http://dalantech.smugmug.com/photos/77556094-M.jpg

http://dalantech.smugmug.com/photos/77077906-M.jpg

http://dalantech.smugmug.com/photos/83699578-M.jpg

http://dalantech.smugmug.com/photos/84824478-M.jpg

[dpastern]

Interesting technique Dalantech - sadly, for some insects cropping is a necessity if you want close up details (midges, springtails, etc). Depends on what you shoot.

Dave

[Dalantech]

Interesting technique Dalantech - sadly, for some insects cropping is a necessity if you want close up details (midges, springtails, etc). Depends on what you shoot.

Dave

True, but if I was shooting tiny subjects I'd by an MPE-65 macro lens ;)

[dpastern]

True, but if I was shooting tiny subjects I'd by an MPE-65 macro lens ;)

Yes, I thought of that, sadly it's an expensive lens, and it's a very specialist lens, macro only 1-5x. If I was really good with macros and had the money, I'd consider it.

Dave

[Lester Wareham]

Correcting the Depth Map in CombineZ

Sometimes the depth map dithers about unnecessarily or creates duplicates of parts of the picture that have moved slightly. These issues can be corrected by the following procedure:

i) In CombineZ save the Depth Map [File->Export Depth Map] This is saved as a colour coded .BMP file.

ii) Open in you preferred image editor. Select the colour you want to paint (in CS2 use the Colour Sample Tool (Eyedropper icon) to set the foreground colour by clicking on the appropriate part of the map.) Then select a soft edge Brush Tool in Normal Mode with 100% Opacity and 100% Flow and paint in as required. Save the File.

iii) Return to CombineZ and load the Depth Map [File->Import Depth Map], a menu will ask you to select what channel colour to use, Green seems to work. Your stacked image will immediately be updated.

[LordV]

Correcting the Depth Map in CombineZ

Sometimes the depth map dithers about unnecessarily or creates duplicates of parts of the picture that have moved slightly. These issues can be corrected by the following procedure:

i) In CombineZ save the Depth Map [File->Export Depth Map] This is saved as a colour coded .BMP file.

ii) Open in you preferred image editor. Select the colour you want to paint (in CS2 use the Colour Sample Tool (Eyedropper icon) to set the foreground colour by clicking on the appropriate part of the map.) Then select a soft edge Brush Tool in Normal Mode with 100% Opacity and 100% Flow and paint in as required. Save the File.

iii) Return to CombineZ and load the Depth Map [File->Import Depth Map], a menu will ask you to select what channel colour to use, Green seems to work. Your stacked image will immediately be updated.

Thanks for the tip Lester- will have to look into this. Have to admit I've tended to stay away from delving in too deeply into combine z5- the only thing I've done so far is to rewrite an alternative main stacking macro to remove the high bypass filter.
Brian V.

[Action_Man]

What i have started using today is a sectional threaded pvc broom handle, the reason being is that it breaks down into around 10" sections and fits nicely into my pocket, and it only weighs a few ounces, and its around 12mm diameter.

I use much in the same way as Brian uses his garden pole but i wanted something that i could carry about and wouldent hinder me at all, and i dont think there is a similar type monopod on the market.

I only have four sections at the moment and will get some more soon, they only take a few seconds to assemble and you can use as many as you need dependant on what height the subject matter is :) .

OK you can start laughing now :D , but i must say it worked reasonably well in its first trial ...

[littlebug1979]

not sure if this is the right place but...im relativly new to the canon, but i have a rebel g2, and i want to get a macro lens does anyone have any suggestions as to what i should go with? i like bugs and plants and stuff, and im not sure what to get theres like a bjillion choices...

[Lester Wareham]

not sure if this is the right place but...im relativly new to the canon, but i have a rebel g2, and i want to get a macro lens does anyone have any suggestions as to what i should go with? i like bugs and plants and stuff, and im not sure what to get theres like a bjillion choices...

Probably not the best place. Try the EF and EF-S sections. Search first becuse the same question has been answered many times so you will find the past replies informative.

[littlebug1979]

thanx ^_^ i learning quite a bit just browsing....

[dpastern]

I posted this on the FM forums a few days ago, thought I'd re-post it here in its entirety:

I also agree with the John Shaw book, it's excellent. I'll try and answer your questions as best as possible.

1. Yes, anything in photography can be expensive. You don't need a MPE-65. How did I know you shoot Canon? You mentioned 1.6x crop, Nikon cameras are 1.5 crops. Plus Nikon doesn't have anything that even remotely touches Canon's excellent MPE-65.

In all honesty, I wouldn't recommend this lens to a newbie. My suggestion is to go for one of these babies:

a. Sigma 105mm
b. Canon 100mm
c. Tamron 90mm

The Sigma most probably will be the cheapest of the 3, but don't let that you fool you, it's an excellent lens. I would recommend a dedicated lens as it'll go 1:1 (ie. life size) and it'll be razor sharp.

2. Yes, you can get these normal lenses that have 'macro' written on them. Beware: they're not true Macro lenses, they usuall only go down to around 0.3:1 (ie. about a third life size), if that. Optically quality is usually not on par with a dedicated macro lens. Sure, you can add dioptre lenses onto the front of these babies to get more magnification, but again, beware: you'll lose optical quality.

If you want to start out, you could try a 50mm lens with a set of extension tubes, they'll give you 1:1 or even more, but the working distance from the insect will be much closer than a dedicated macro lens. And furthermore, you can't easily change magnifcations on the fly like you can with a dedicated macro lens, but instead have to remove or add tubes. They usually come in a set of 3, something like 12mm, 24mm and 36mm or thereabouts. Optical quality is excellent, as there's no glass involved.

3. As a general rule, most dedicated macro lenses will be only 1:1. Tubes (as an example Kenko) with a 50mm will give you around 1.8:1. The maths when using tubes is usually:

length of tubes/focal length of primary lens

ie 68/50, which works out to about 1.4:1. From experience, I know that these equations are only rough, and that magnifcation is best worked out using a ruler, hence myself saying that instead of it being 1.4:1, it's actually around 1.8:1 or so. Take a shot of the rule, and work out how many mm fill the frame. As an example, with a 1.6 crop camera, the 30D, the sensor measures 22.5mm wide by 15mm high. If you photograph a ruler, if the entire image takes up 22.5 you're shooting at 1:1. If you're shooting at higher magnifications than 1:1, simply use this to determine magnification:

sensor width/ruler coverage

Of course, Canon's MPE-65 is a zoomable macro, going from 1:1 to 5:1. You don't need these ultra high magnifcations imho. I personally feel that they spoil macro photography, by removing the Insect or Arachnid from its surroundings. That's just a personal viewpoint, each to their own.

From 1:1 to 2:1 you can handheld, it does take a lot of practice, but it can be done. Higher magnifcations are much more difficult due to magnified camera shake and a much dimmer viewfinder image.

Oh, I forgot reversed lenses. It's quite common to use a reversed 50mm. You can either handhold the 50mm lens in front of the camera mount (not really recommended) or buy adaptors that allow you to mount it onto the camera mount. Ebay has lots of sellers selling them. You'll get reasonably good magnifcation and optical quality, the drawbacks will include vignetting in the corners, and complete loss of f stop control on the lens being reversed. Plus, the rear element of the lens is open to the elements. For these reasons, it's a good idea to buy an el cheapo 2nd hand 50mm - it doesn't matter what brand. Nikon f1.8 or Pentax SMC 1.8 50mm lenses are good options optically. You can also mount the reversed 50mm onto another lens using the same method of an adaptor to get more magnification, you'll experience some drop in optical quality.

There are also things such as bellows, that give you a working range of magnifications, but in all honesty they're more trouble than they're worth, and you'll almost certainly have to use a tripod.

In all honesty, go for something like a Sigma 105mm, you'll get 1:1, a good working distance (so as not to spook the insect or spider), and excellent optical quality, as well as the ability to change very easily your magnifications.

Hope this helps.

Dave

[Samdiver74]

If you photograph a ruler, if the entire image takes up 22.5 you're shooting at 1:1. If you're shooting at higher magnifications than 1:1, simply use this to determine magnification:


I have a 20D, with the 70mm-300mm Sigma DG lens set on Macro, I then grabbed the Canon FD 50mm f1.8 lens and placed it reversed on the front of my Sigma lens and I just tried the above technique, worked my focus manually.
I took two pictures of a stainless steel ruler, the first was set on 300mm and the resultant pic showed 4mm.
The second picture at the 200mm setting showed approx 5.5mm I think a little closer to 6mm

So What is the magnification ratio?
1st Picture
22.5mm (20D sensor size) divided by 4mm (number of mm showing in captured image) equals 5.625, so is that 5X magnification?
2nd Picture
22.5mm divided by 5.5mm equals 4.09, so is that 4X magnification?

if this is correct I think I am going to buy an adapter ring and do some experimenting.

[dpastern]

Those magnifications sound about right :)

Fear the dark side of macro, for it will consume your path :)

Dave

[Alex Paul]

How to set up and shoot the reversed 50.....

I posted this on FM as I got a number of requests to explain how I get the results from my Reversed 50 set up and what settings I use.... I thought I would share it here so that anyone thinking about getting into it will have the info....Thanks I hope this is a help....Alex

First let me say I am no self proclaimed expert at this stuff but I have been getting a lot of requests to explain how I am using the reversed 50 set up....Most of us have seen outstanding Reversed 50 work and I, like the folks who are now showing an interest, decided I had to try it out... I have learned a few things a long the way, and this is to share what I have figured out while attempting to get good at it....My hope is that in sharing what I do to get the results I am achieving you will be smoking me shortly, and others who have success with it might throw in some useful tips that will help all of us improve..... My set up consists of a 70-200 f4 Canon lens with a reversed Nikkor 50mm f1.4. I made my own adapter to reverse mount the 50 but I don't recommend wasting the time as they are cheap to buy and I am sure more solid.... Here are 2 sites that sell the adapter ring sets and also have some more good info you should read........Both were posted here back some time ago...

http://www.kirkphoto.com/polarizers.html (http://www.kirkphoto.com/polarizers.html)

http://www.camerafilters.com/pages/macrorings.aspx (http://www.camerafilters.com/pages/macrorings.aspx)

You are connecting the 50mm and what ever main lens you are using, filter thread to filter thread by way of the rings from the above sites....

In shooting the rev 50 set up you must get the flash out to the front of the stacked lenses as working distance will usually be 1" or less. Needless to say a hot shoe mounted flash won't squeek in where the light needs to get with so little space....Sooo... Off camera flash adapter chord is a must and you will need a good flash bracket as well.... I am currently liking the Manfrotto macro flash bracket as it seems to have plenty of adjustment, though at times I wish it was a bit more rigid but it works fine...I also have 2 different flash units. 1 MT-24 and a basic 420 with Stofen diffuser. I just use the basic 420 on the bracket for the rev 50 setup because the MT needs to be rigged and I hate using tape to hold the flash head mount on which I have done but it sucks.. When hand holding your shots this will be what you want. When tripod shooting I usually remove the flash from the bracket and take 3 shots essentially bracketing by changing the flash angle and location to see what is most effective.... Focusing can be a real challenge because you are shooting in manual mode and that includes focusing..... (Be sure any auto focus function is turned off on your lenses). If hand holding indoors I usually have a good bright room light on.... If tripod shooting I will often times use a flashlight to illuminate the bug to hit "perfect" focus, and then turn it off and start shooting.... I assume some people use other means for all of this stuff, but I use as little as I can get away with http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/emoticons/wink.gif.

The basic lens settings..

If you have a manual 50mm you will set the lens aperture wide open.. If auto, mount the lens to camera, turn the camera on and adjust aperture to wide open. Turn camera off and lens will remain at that setting... Remove lens and mount to main lens..... The aperture needs to be wide open to help reduce vignetting, and with lenses stacked it is a plus that it lets as much light in as possiblehttp://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/emoticons/wink.gif . I have no experience shooting a prime lens as my main lens and so can only share my experience using the 70-200 zoom... My guess is any main lens that is capable of 65mm focal length or longer will work well for that up close and personal outcome..

I leave the 50 set up at infinity focus and never use it to focus... "Set it and forget it"... I use the focusing ring on the main lens occasionally but usually achieve focus moving the lens in and out. If I am using tripod I will use the focus ring if I am really close to focus and don't want to mess with moving the tripod as I don't use a focusing rail.... Main reason is bugs move and the less to fiddle with the better IMHO..

What I have found I really like about using a zoom lens for the primary lens is it allows you to frame the shots. 70mm gives a wider view and many times you can get a bug profile shot and get most or all of the bug in the frame. When you want to shoot for detail on an eye, a Midge, aphid, or some other dust speck size bug you can zoom right up to 200 and count the number of dingle berries if you are so inclinedhttp://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/emoticons/smiley.gif http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/emoticons/smiley.gif... The flash I leave set on ETTL, with High Speed Sync and it seems to adjust pretty well....

Typically I start with the following settings if hand holding... ISO 200, f11 and shutter speed 250. I take a couple of test shots to see how the exposure looks and adjust as need usually adjusting shutter speed, but not going below 160...If still under exposed I will take aperture down to f5.6, but keeping in mind the DOF gets reallllly thin at about that point.... Final step is jack the ISO if needed....The adjustments priority changes if DOF is a prime consideration...... You do need to experiment to find what works best for the shot you are going for.....I will shoot as high as f 29 with ISO cranked to 1600 if I want to shoot more depth than just a profile or a detailed surface shot but..... It will give some vignetting and the shot has to be cropped to get rid of it.....

Another critical thing I can think of is you need to pay close attention to the angle at which you are shooting at.... If you don't get the lens squared up to the bug you will have one part in perfect focus and the rest of the frame way out...Get squared up when possible.....A good way to practice in the beginning is to get bugs that don't move around much and set up a stage on a kitchen counter (Or whatever is handy) Get some leaves put them on a cup saucer, or Tupperware lid and place the bug out toward the edge.... You can get your rig dialed in fairly easily when you control the stage which with this set up you have a good chance that you will...Flash placement is also key to good shots....

When possible shoot with flash at different angles and distances.. Check the LCD screen when you can to see if you are looking pretty good..... I shoot Jpeg and don't use the histogram I just look to see if it is looking good, or if it doesn't. I hope this made sense and that it helps get others going on the fun of the Rev 50.....

Once you get the hang of the settings and basic technique it is very cool to see the detail on the reallllly small things.......If I have missed an important step or if anyone has tips to add to this post please feel free.........Take care....Alex


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif

[Samdiver74]

OK so I got my adapter rings yesterday, and decided to play around alittle bit.
Using my Sigma 70mm - 300mm lens I used my old Canon 28mm 2.8 FD lens
Opened up all the way.
this is the results of the magnification.
at 300mm had 2mm in the picture which according to calculations = 11.25 X
WOW :eek: now can you say really shallow depth of field.
So I figured lets see what else I can come up with
at 200mm had 3mm in the picture this = 7.5X
at 135mm had 4mm in the picture this = 5.625X
at 70mm had 6.25mm in the picture this = 3.6X
at this lower end of the scale get vignetting pretty bad, still need to crop the image.
The subject distance from the lens varied slightly but overall was between 1.5 inch to .5 inch

Dpastern
looking at the images below do they look about right for the magnification.
I have been wanting to get the Canon MPE 65mm but I have heard that it is not the macro lens to get first off, so after experimenting with the lens reversing technique I can see why. Shallow DOF, close subject distance. although the distinct advantage is the optics are really sharp on the MPE and there is no vignetting throughout the 1 - 5X magnification range, is this true?

Here are some example pics
Pic 1 Wife's anniversary ring
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/8127/wifesanniringat1xyr9.jpg

Pic 2 Wife's anniversary ring partial crop of above image
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/645/sring1xcroppedmx5.jpg

Pic 3 My Dive watch I think this is at 1X magnification uncropped (Just resized straight out of the camera)
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/6361/divewatchat15xda7.jpg

Pic 4 Dive watch 7.5 X magnification on the date uncropped (Just resized straight out of the camera)
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/4839/divewatchdateat75xwc2.jpg

Pic 5 Dive watch date at 11.25 X magnification uncropped (just resized straight out of the camera)
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/9012/divewatchdateat1125xog0.jpg

Pic 6 My .5mm mechanical pencil tip at 11.25X I appologise for the image quality but due to the magnification the depth of field is really really shallow, the only way I can see about over coming this is to focus stack, but it would still end up with at least 5 images to stack, and this is something that I am new to.
Also with 11X if you have to focus stack then this is obviously going to be useless in capturing bugs etc. definitely need focusing rails with this set up
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/149/5mmpenciltipcloseto11xmnb7.jpg

[LordV]

Link to a make your own flash macro diffuser out of a couple of coke cans :)

http://www.flickr.com/groups/macroviewers/discuss/72157594312315664/

Brian V.

[CP!]

Okay I know this might sound really really really REALLY stupid..:oops: ((keep in mind I haven't read the whole thread)) but is it true that some cameras can zoom and take macro? Sorry for the stupid question:confused:

[Action_Man]

Okay I know this might sound really really really REALLY stupid..:oops: ((keep in mind I haven't read the whole thread)) but is it true that some cameras can zoom and take macro? Sorry for the stupid question:confused:

There arent any stupid questions - i assume most people use zoom when taking macro shots - point and shoot cameras usually have a certain amount of optical zoom and digital zoom - in my camera i go the maximum amount of optical zoom - digital zoom isent very useful at all really - its like enlarging your image in a graphics package ...

[jfrancho]

Okay I know this might sound really really really REALLY stupid.. ((keep in mind I haven't read the whole thread)) but is it true that some cameras can zoom and take macro? Sorry for the stupid question
My little Powerershot S500 has a "macro" mode. It isn't really 1:1, but it's pretty close and produces nice images. I bet your camera has this too. Look for a button labeled with a flower icon, or check the manual.

[Samdiver74]

How to set up and shoot the reversed 50.....

Alex
I just got my Delta flip flash bracket and had a play around with the reverse 50 Set-up late last night (after I recieved it I had to go upto Home depot and get some washers etc cause of the length of the Camera mount screw)
So far I have been able to get a couple of shots at 5X handheld, man it is tricky though, to say the least.
I think I'm going to get hooked on this now.

I'll do some more playing around with it later today.
What settings do you typically have set on the flash.

Fear the dark side of macro, for it will consume your path :)

Thanks Dave I'm going to be consumed :)

[Dalantech]

Posted here: http://www.dalantech.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/83636/

[LordV]

Tutorial on this here
http://www.flickr.com/groups/macroviewers/discuss/72157594586623228/

Brian V.

[Samdiver74]

Brian
That is very cool, thank you

[Dalantech]

My blog (link in my signature) is where I post tips on shooting macro, and there is a menu on the side with any articles that I have on my web site.

[rammy]

Hello all,

I've just started in Macro and would like some links on identifying flora and fauna and within the kingdom of living things.

Anyone have any good links to post here?

Thanks!

[Lester Wareham]

Hello all,

I've just started in Macro and would like some links on identifying flora and fauna and within the kingdom of living things.

Anyone have any good links to post here?

Thanks!

Quite a few on my links page (http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Links.htm). Also there are some good reference books (http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Books.htm)that are not all expensive.

[robgr85]

Quite a few on my links page (http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Links.htm). Also there are some good reference books (http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Books.htm)that are not all expensive.

thanks for that links. just wanted to post the same question as rammy did.

Robert

[narlus]

anyone have a quick and dirty primer on the various combinations of extension tubes and lens focal lengths? i suppose i could just trial and error it, but if there's a basic outline of how these work together, it'd be appreciated.

[Lester Wareham]

anyone have a quick and dirty primer on the various combinations of extension tubes and lens focal lengths? i suppose i could just trial and error it, but if there's a basic outline of how these work together, it'd be appreciated.

Magnification=Extension/FocalLength=SizeofImage/SizeofObject

Note that this can be directly applied for lenses set to infinity. When the lens is set to closest focus it gets more complex; but the short answer is the magnification increases.

A: For lenses that focus by overall linear extension, the closes focus just adds a few millimeters of addition extension.

B: For lenses that focus by internal focus the lens focal length reduces and some extension is added.

If you get the Canon tubes they come with a little table for most Canon lenses but only for the 25mm and 12mm tubes in isolation as that is all Canon officially sanctions. If you skull around on WWW.BOBATKINS.COM he has most of the table values listed somewhere.

So typically 50mm of extension with a 50mm lens gets you to life size.

With, for example, the 100mm macro, because the lens gets to life size any way adding 65mm of extension gets you to about 2:2:1.

So at life size on an APS-C camera something 22mm long will fill the frame, at 2:1 it only needs to 11mm long to fill the frame.

[narlus]

nice, thanks lester.

as of now, i've just used the longest extension tube solo w/ the 50mm and 85mm primes. can these be used w/ the 70-200 lens as well? i found that by using all 3 tubes, it seemed like i couldn't get focus (perhaps the focal point was behind the front element of the lens?)

[Lester Wareham]

nice, thanks lester.

as of now, i've just used the longest extension tube solo w/ the 50mm and 85mm primes. can these be used w/ the 70-200 lens as well? i found that by using all 3 tubes, it seemed like i couldn't get focus (perhaps the focal point was behind the front element of the lens?)

Canon only specify for the 12 and 25mm tubes (and do for the 70-200 2.8L IS) but I would think you should be able to use 68mm of extension (Kenko tubes?) at the long end at least and probably the wide end.

Certainly can use a big stack like that with the 200/2.8L.

[gubak1]

Canon only specify for the 12 and 25mm tubes (and do for the 70-200 2.8L IS) but I would think you should be able to use 68mm of extension (Kenko tubes?) at the long end at least and probably the wide end.

Certainly can use a big stack like that with the 200/2.8L.
Unless I am mistaken, canon specify 12 and 20mm!

[Lester Wareham]

Unless I am mistaken, canon specify 12 and 20mm!

Canon sell a 12mm tube and a 25mm tube so these are the lengths they specify and yes you are mistaken. ;)

[Gliderparentntn]

I'm a bit loss here. I've read the thread and thus far I have gathered this. Use an aperature setting fo f/11 and higher and if I need to open it up do so if I can't get proper exposures. Use a flash try and get as much light on the background of the subject w/o blowing it out. ISO seems to vary by opinions from 100-400 Shutter speeds of 125 and faster.

Ok I have done all but 1 of these as I just received my 580ex flash a couple days ago. My light has been good as I tried to take my shots were the light was on the subject. I lack those really close up sharp images such as the hairs on a spider or the fuzzys on a flower. My lens is the 100 f/2.8 macro.
Would or do I need extensiuon tubes or a 1.4 extender or both to get in there and magnify my subject to where I capture those real fine details?

I got lost on the 1:1 stuff mentioned a page or 2 back so if the poster of this ratio can PM to keep from cluttering up this sticky and please explain this ratio stuff I greatly appreciate it. Also advice from anyone here is also appreciated.
I know you're going to ask for pictures. They were so bad I deleted them yea that bad. I know it takes alot of practice but I also know I need that one decent shot to work from so I can learn and improve from it. As it is I have nothing to work from at this point.

[Lester Wareham]

I'm a bit loss here. I've read the thread and thus far I have gathered this. Use an aperature setting fo f/11 and higher and if I need to open it up do so if I can't get proper exposures. Use a flash try and get as much light on the background of the subject w/o blowing it out. ISO seems to vary by opinions from 100-400 Shutter speeds of 125 and faster.

Ok I have done all but 1 of these as I just received my 580ex flash a couple days ago. My light has been good as I tried to take my shots were the light was on the subject. I lack those really close up sharp images such as the hairs on a spider or the fuzzys on a flower. My lens is the 100 f/2.8 macro.
Would or do I need extensiuon tubes or a 1.4 extender or both to get in there and magnify my subject to where I capture those real fine details?

I got lost on the 1:1 stuff mentioned a page or 2 back so if the poster of this ratio can PM to keep from cluttering up this sticky and please explain this ratio stuff I greatly appreciate it. Also advice from anyone here is also appreciated.
I know you're going to ask for pictures. They were so bad I deleted them yea that bad. I know it takes alot of practice but I also know I need that one decent shot to work from so I can learn and improve from it. As it is I have nothing to work from at this point.

James, I think you need to explain more clearly what you have been doing.

Why not start a new thread, clearly set out f-stops, iso & shutter speeds used, what magnification roughly you were working at, how big the subject was, if you used flash, handheld, monopod or tripod. (Else you can PM me and I'll try and help out).

You should be able to get very sharp results with the 100mm macro even if you have to crop a bit. Of course if the subject is really tiny they detail may not show up so well.

[Attic]

Here is a link to an easy to make free Flash Diffuser.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=350914

[KentDurvin]

If you have limited equipment, like me with my A80, you will find focusing a chore. To get extra depth of field, I use Aperture mode, set the the highest number available, which also means the smallest hole, the least light, and therefore the longest shutter speed. Still, in full sun I can hand hold pretty well. For mushrooms, etc. I brace the camera on a root or something, and hold my hands very still. Sometimes I get a blur, but I usually know, and I shoot again.

[Lester Wareham]

I did some comparative tests of various combinations of 50, 200 and 300mm lens plus tubes and TCs against the MP-E and EF 100mm macro which some might find interesting. Also includes the 100mm macro with a 2X TC.

http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Macro/index.htm

[Mike4BekA]

Interesting test lester!

[Lester Wareham]

Interesting test lester!

Thanks Mike, I will probably add a bokeh compare also I think, so check back to the page now and again if that is of interest.

[Mike4BekA]

very much so! Thanks again

[LordV]

I did some comparative tests of various combinations of 50, 200 and 300mm lens plus tubes and TCs against the MP-E and EF 100mm macro which some might find interesting. Also includes the 100mm macro with a 2X TC.

http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Macro/index.htm


Excellent testing Lester :)
One thing re some of the lenses is I wonder how important flat field performance actually is in practice (unless you are photographing stamps or something). Just when I was forced to use a pentax 50mm lens with tubes rather than my sigma 105mm I actually got some of the best shots I had achieved- It eventually dawned on me that this was because I was shooting at 1.5:1 rather than 1:1 and indeed my 105mm ex was also great when used with ext tubes. The one thing I didn't notice with the 50mm lens was field curvature (because I was shooting 3-D subjects) even though I suspect it was there.

brian V.

[Lester Wareham]

Excellent testing Lester :)
One thing re some of the lenses is I wonder how important flat field performance actually is in practice (unless you are photographing stamps or something). Just when I was forced to use a pentax 50mm lens with tubes rather than my sigma 105mm I actually got some of the best shots I had achieved- It eventually dawned on me that this was because I was shooting at 1.5:1 rather than 1:1 and indeed my 105mm ex was also great when used with ext tubes. The one thing I didn't notice with the 50mm lens was field curvature (because I was shooting 3-D subjects) even though I suspect it was there.

brian V.

Certainly in normal photography with wide angle lenses field curvature is not such a huge issue, I still test with a flat target however just to have a consistent standard. Testing with a 3D target means it can be difficult to know if one lens is sharper than the other just because the target happens to have more detail where one lens has field curvature. (this is what I call the testing in the back garden problem)

I guess in macro work, as long as you know how the field curves, and as long as it does not change dramatically with fstop (which it probably will) you can just take advantage of it, in general though I think it is easier mentally to deal with a flat focus plane in real life IMHO.

As far as testing goes there is a lot of the same potential for confusion unless a 3D target that has fairly uniform detail over the field curvature depth is used. So in theory you could do it, but I have doubts about my brain being to make use of a curved field in real life.

[ShutterMomma]

Hi. I use a Canon XTi with a Tamron AF 80-300mm 1:4-5.6 tele-macro (1:2) lens. And I also have a Tamron 28-80mm as well. Now I used the tele-macro lense to take this shot. I was at the closest distance, but I want it bigger. How /or what do I need to get the shot bigger that actual size?

[Bill Pham]

Hi. I use a Canon XTi with a Tamron AF 80-300mm 1:4-5.6 tele-macro (1:2) lens. And I also have a Tamron 28-80mm as well. Now I used the tele-macro lense to take this shot. I was at the closest distance, but I want it bigger. How /or what do I need to get the shot bigger that actual size?

what do you mean by bigger? closer to 1 to 1 ratio. if so i either get a dedicated macro lenses or extenstion tubes or close up filters. hope that help some.

Bill

[ShutterMomma]

By bigger, I mean that , for example, the eye would fill the frame. Now If I was to go out and buy a macro set up, what would be the better way to go. Low priced but still good. Wanted results would be larger that life-size.

[Bill Pham]

well depend on how much you want to spend i guess. personnally i get a lens. they all are pretty good. maybe canon 60 ef-s lens. cheapest one i think. i'm sure somebody will comes along and steer you better than i can.

Bill

[PiRho]

Wanted results would be larger that life-size.

the only lens that Canon curently makes that is Larger then life size is the MP E65, that will definitely set you back a pretty penny. as previously stated you may go with a 50 or 60mm macro. however those alone will only get 1:1 if it is important to get greater then life then you would have to also get some extension tubes or close up filters.

does that help any? we can help you spend your money but we kinda need to know what we are dealing with.

~Z

[ShutterMomma]

lol no doubt it's easy to spend money when buying new stuff for your camera! I guess the cheaper way to go is a 50mm lens with extension tubes, but what if, instead of a 50mm lens, I'd use: Tamron AF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 or Tamron AF 80-300mm 1:4-5.6 tele-macro (1:2) with extension tubes. what difference would it make?

[Bill Pham]

not sure how those other lenses you mention will work. but if you gonna get the 50 with tubes. i recommend you look at least at the 60 ef-s first. sorry not helping you much here. i got no exprience with those lenses.

Bill

[ShutterMomma]

lol that's ok. The 60 ef-s makes sense. But that brings me to another question: What makes the macro lens "macro? What's the diference between a 60mm prime and a 60mm macro ?

[Bill Pham]

the 60 macro is a prime also. it just get you a 1 to 1 ratio. not sure if there is a regular 60 lens out there.

Bill

[Samdiver74]

You're gonna have to take into consideration also, that the more magnification you get, the closer you'll have to get to your subject. (Stand off Distance will be reduced) quite considerably.

For a cheap way try looking for an old 28mm lens and buy a EOS mount adapter which will allow you to reverse fit the 28mm lens directly to the camera body, the only problem with this method is you have to control the aperture manually.
But you can get some good results.
Apart from the cost of the old lens the EOS mount adapter is like $20 on ebay.
The best step would be to go with the Canon 100mm Macro and a set of tubes.
This test was done with the Canon 100-400 lens set at 100mm and a full set of Kenko tubes

100mm with 36mm + 20mm + 12mm (68mm) = 5 1/2 in minimum distance from subject.
Although the tubes and a nifty 50 would probably work good too.

[ShutterMomma]

well I do have a Tamron 80-300mm... I might just get the tubes and try it with this lens for now to see what I get. I can always use the tubes on a different lens later...

[amandajane]

Hi, I have just purchased the Canon 100mm Macro and am wondering what would be the least expensive way of gaining extra magnification? I am not familiar with macro work and would appreciate any advice, thanks! :0)

[Lester Wareham]

Hi, I have just purchased the Canon 100mm Macro and am wondering what would be the least expensive way of gaining extra magnification? I am not familiar with macro work and would appreciate any advice, thanks! :0)

A 65 to 68mm stack of extension tubes will give you about 2:1 magnification but reduce the minimum focus distance and you loose infinity focus.

Most people use the Kenko set of tubes but I prefer the Canon ones.

[amandajane]

Thanks Leslie!

[marklori43]

I have the 40D and the Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro DG. I also have some close up filters (Toshiba 3 piece set). Any recommendations to improve the magnification? Tubes? What is the most affordable macro flash available for someone on a TIGHT budget?

[Lester Wareham]

I have the 40D and the Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro DG. I also have some close up filters (Toshiba 3 piece set). Any recommendations to improve the magnification? Tubes? What is the most affordable macro flash available for someone on a TIGHT budget?

Yes you could use tubes which should give better IQ and more magnification than the diopter filters, the down side is your working distance (from end of lens to subject) will get very short with a 50mm. (it does not help you but this is why most of us use a macro lens around 100mm for general work).

As for the flash, the ring flash is much cheaper than the twin flash although not nearly as flexible and well featured. There are one or two 3rd party ring flashes, I can't comment on how well these do or don't work with ETTL II, myself I don't like the ring shaped highlights from ring flashes anyway.

For the cheapest flash solution it is probably best for you to get a small Canon general flash and mount it on a flash bracket, you will need the hot-shoe cord to connect the flash and maintain auto ETTL II exposure. You definitely don't want to be doing manual flash for macro, I know from experience in the days of film.

[macro junkie]

my tip of the day is

when shooting in the Field dont use a tripod..insects wont wait around for u to position it and make it level.instead use part of your body to lean your lens on.
for this shot i had my right arm lent on my right knee and i had the edge of the lens lent on the leaf.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1115/1126289115_fcad803602_b.jpg

[10-Dee-Q]

hi, im newbie to macro
but i have questions,
of all the lenses that i have (see my sig)
what is the best way to get 1:1 macro abilitty ?
ext tube, fiter, reverse ring, etc

cause i want to try first if i like macro so much , i;ll buy 100 f2/8 macro,
thx

xctually i want to know is there anyway i can make my 50 f/1,8 mkii to become 1:1 macro lens ?
what to buy >
thank you.

[Alexey]

Well i gues the extension tubes is the cheapest way to macro photography.I used some very cheap kenko 2X AF teleconverter from wich i take out the glass and get fine 30+ something extension tube.I worked some time with that ext. tube and 50 f/1,8 mkii and results are very,very nice;)

[Aussieroo]

Here is a list I posted on another thread, it seems apropriate to add it to the great advice given here. Some will have been covered before but it won't hurt to see them again in this list. Hope they help:
In no particular order just as they come to mind.


1. Get yourself some gardening knee pads, as you will be on your knees more often than not.

2. You will find a cable release invaluable.

3. An angle viewfinder helps as well saves lying on the ground at times.

4. Using the "Mirror up" option when in real close helps in eliminating that minute chance of vibration from the shutter.

5. When in grassy wet areas a pair of rubber boots helps as well.

6. Keep an old pair of scissors in your camera bag for getting rid of any annoying grass stalks that may be in the background making it messy.

7. Concentrate as much on the background as the subject matter. A busy messy background will distract for the subject and will be difficult to remove later in PS. Keep the back ground as blurred as possible checking your DOF and aperture.

8. Be sure you are as parallel to the subject as possible. Shooting at an angle will result in too much out of focus due to shallow DOF. You may have to shoot up, you may have to shoot down the angle will depend on how the subject is positioned.

9. Get in as close as you can without frightening the subject away.

10. Use a tripod where ever you can Remember with the Velbum you can remove the bottom half of the support stalk to get even lower to the ground. A Ball head is very handy for those odd angles and adjustments.

11. Be aware of lighting. Shadows are easier to keep highlight from blowing out and using slow shutter speeds will give you exposure you need.

12. Practice shooting in RAW and the doing your initial edit in the PS RAW editor.

13. Use manual focus always

14. Shoot early in the morning while insects are cold and less likely to move. Best in the spring when days are warm to hatch the insects but cold enough mornings to have them nice and slow.

15. Take your time with every shot, shoot less and shoot better.

16. Enjoy the "Hunt" and learn to look down and see small things. Sometimes sitting still in a reedy area your eyes will become accustomed to the things around you and you will start to see smaller things you previously have missed.

17. Learn the habitat and habits of what you are likely to shoot. Times of year and times of day etc.

18. develop your skills in editing for even better results.

[PiRho]

Very nice list Ralph! thanks! I really do appreciate how helpful people are on this forum! I have only been getting into photography for the last 2 years+- and only got on here since early this year. and I have learned more on here then in everything else combined (except of course experience).

Thanks,

[dfrois]

No pro here, but I would like to tell what works for me. It surprises me that there are so few mentions of my favorite macro hardware - the bellows. EOS bodies have the wonderful characteristic that they can measure light without a lens on the body (unlike Nikons, for instance, where only the most expensive bodies measure light without a Af lens mounted). This means that any manual lens that can focused and stopped down manually can be used with any EOS body. It also means that automatic TTL flash works with any contraption that you would care to mount. That is why I use a Mamiya M42 bellows with an EOS-M42 adapter, together with a good M42 lens (there are many to choose from, and dirt cheap too). The bellows allows adapting the reproduction ratio on-the-fly, by stretching or shortening it, and, with a rather long lens (I tend to use 100 or 135mm lenses, with 200mm reserved for very skittish creatures), has a working distance greater than mos macro lenses (which tend to shorten focal length as they get bigger reproduction ratios, especially Internal Focus ones). For extreme ratios, you can always use a shorter lens; 75mm, 50mm or even 35mm or 28mm wides.

I almost always use the bellows handheld, with a cobra flash attached to the bottom rail (intended for focusing) via a ball-head, so that I can vary the distance and position of the flash relative to the lens quickly. I have used several lenses in this manner with (to me) good results: Takumar 135 f4, Tele-Tessar 135 f4, Scheider-Kreuznach Componon-S 60mm f4.5 (enlarger lens), Mamiya-Sekor 200 f3.5, and even a Sakar 300 f5.6, for extreme distances, which is much sharper than expected. I do not use zooms (I have used the Sigma 70-300 APO 4-5.6 MACRO, but not anymore - not sharp enough). I have tried tubes, but, since I work handheld and never knowing what I am going to find, I consider them too inflexible. Changing reproduction ratios takes a long time and plenty of movement. Same with add-on lenses, except on zooms...but then sharpness suffers.

The best thing going for this kind of gear is that it is dirt cheap. An M42 bellows can be had on eBay for 30 to 50 USD, and any good brand 135mm lens that is mountable on it costs 20 to 50 bucks more, and can be used to start. All you need then is an EOS-M42 adapter, and, if you don`t go initially for high ratios, even the integrated flash will work.

All this can be done with other types of equipment (Bellows and lenses), provided there is an EOS-brandX adapter available: Nikon, Contax, Olympus-OM, etc. But the M42 option is probably the cheapest.

Mind you, it is hard to work with, since everything (focusing, aperture, etc.) is non-auto, but that is normal in macro-photography, IMHO.

It works for me...

Just my two cents.

DF

[Ballen Photo]

It surprises me that there are so few mentions of my favorite macro hardware - the bellows.
You're "RIGHT"! I thought I had posted my M42 bellows to EOS kit in this thread, but looking after seeing your post made me realize that I had not. :rolleyes:
Here's my set up including a 55mm Pentax F/1.7 lens in M42 mount.
-Bruce
http://www.fototime.com/A2D37CDBBFDBF07/standard.jpg
And here is a result from it. Note, This image is "not" cropped. ;)
http://www.fototime.com/E6D08A915813032/standard.jpg

[Ballen Photo]

One more example of what this set up can do.
This was a very small circuit board to begin with.
-Bruce
http://www.fototime.com/622862C1DF4DD37/standard.jpg And the uncropped result.
http://www.fototime.com/43AF884DD0E1C3B/standard.jpg

[skywalkerbeth]

Great thread, might be buying a macro soon...

[CamDiver]

Find something very small ............ :)

[john-in-japan]

Greetings - Perusing the thread, is there general consensus on using mirror lock up to reduce vibration or only under special circumstances (Specifically for the MPE-65)? Any rule of thumb on when to use it with other macro lenses?
Thank!
John

[troypiggo]

Think you'll find that mirror lockup is rarely used. Rely on shutter speed, flash, steady hands, technique to minimise movement. Some use a beanpole like this (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=24569), others hold the leaf a bug is on with left hand while at same time holding lens so that if hand moves the subject moves with it.

[Lester Wareham]

Greetings - Perusing the thread, is there general consensus on using mirror lock up to reduce vibration or only under special circumstances (Specifically for the MPE-65)? Any rule of thumb on when to use it with other macro lenses?
Thank!
John

Only when using a tripod, then always.

Most insect work is handheld for me and most people here.

Occasionally use the MP-E in a studio in which case I use a tripod is the subject is not too mobile or unanimated, mostly I use it in the field with the MT-24EX.

[bob1938]

I have a Canon 400d I'm using a Sigma 105 1:2.8 what setting should I put it on to Portrait, Cose up etc & what is the best ISO to use. I realize it all depend on the light time of day but what rule of thumd can you advise.

[troypiggo]

Lighting is the key to exposure and settings. Do you have an external flash? It matters because the answer depends on what is providing your light - sun or flash. It also matters if you're talking about true macro at 1:1 or thereabouts, ie with your 105 lens at minimum focus, or if your talking about just shooting insects at a slightly greater distance like 500mm or 1m.

Assuming 1:1 or thereabouts...

Flash: I shoot full Manual; ISO 100-400 depending on sunlight, typically ISO 200; 1/100s-1/250s shutter speed, typically 1/200s; f/8-f/11 aperture; flash on E-TTL metering as "fill flash".

No flash, natural light only: I'd still shoot full Manual (that's all I shoot), keep similar setting to above but increase ISO to maybe 400-800, maybe drop shutter speed to 1/100-1/160.

It's a balancing act. You need the apertures around f/8 to f/11 to get reasonable depth of field, but not too much beyond f/16 because you'll get softer images (diffraction softening). You need shutter speeds up 1/100, preferably 1/200-250 to freeze motion since you're shooting moving objects, but these restrict the light coming in. To compensate you might increase ISO, but that introduces noise. Fun, hey? :)

If you're talking about shooting insects at slightly further distance, you can probably open the apertures up a little since the distance will give you a bigger working distance. So maybe f/4-f/8 at 1metre I guess.

If you don't want to shoot full Manual, I think most use either Av set at f/8-f/11 and play with ISO to get reasonable shutter speeds.

So many variables I know.

[macro junkie]

another position i shoot in.check how i use my left index finger and thumb as a sort of tripod.works very well at high mag.

i set the mag i want on my lens..then move back and forth till the subject is in focus

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3119/2568479996_6d10612ce6_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2261/2517921017_84f0e15e6d_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3030/2543607864_3d2428d85b_o.jpg

[Ballen Photo]

another position i shoot in.check how i use my left index finger and thumb as a sort of tripod.works very well at high mag.

i set the mag i want on my lens..then move back and forth till the subject is in focus
Nice results. (Nice suit too.) :)
-Bruce

[macro junkie]

Nice results. (Nice suit too.) :)
-Bruce
lol..saves me getting stung..what you dont see in this shot is about 12 bee hives behind me..and the keepers where looking through them..there was bees every where.gd fun tho :)

[borgy1981]

@ macro junkie: great shots dude! ill be considering this tip...

[SwiftFootTim]

There was an excellent tutorial on extension tubes about a month ago, but I can't find it through searching the forum. It basically showed examples of extension tubes on different lenses of different lengths and such. Does anyone know where that thread is?

[motleypixel]

Here’s what I would do…

Read this entire thread, I guarantee you will glean hundreds of tips…some will work for you and some won’t. Just practice with your gear and find what works best for you. There are too many varying circumstances between environment and subject to say one way works better than another.

Then after that, go out and try to build one of these (http://www.motleypixel.com/reviews/index.htm?openfolder=Lighting%20and%20Gear/DIY%20Ring%20Flash/) :D

-Roy

[SwiftFootTim]

Ohh believe me, that ringflash project will be undertaken by me when I get up the will and time to do it. For the price you really can't beat that!

[digitalinfant]

I say shoot away. I am a newby that uses my wifes p80, I ordered a 50d which I have yet to get from UPS. I believe the person that got me started by making box cameras for architecture model shoots was right. The more you practice the better decisions you make with any camera or lens. I am like you, I just wanted to get going. click away my friend. The best photos come from those who love taking them.

[Canon Man 50d]

Looks like I need to learn alot about Macro Photography, what I good place this is to start.
Heres one of my pics, 1/125 f6.3 ISO 800 50d+150 Sigma Handheld, I need to get a monopod.

[PiRho]

Excellent start! and Welcome to POTN! I can't tell if the eyes are in sharp focus or not from here, but you have some amazing potential! keep it up! and don't be afraid to post a new thread with some shots for folks to critique! we (POTNers) will be more then happy to help you get better!

Thanks for sharing, and again. Welcome

[montse]

I just finish reading all the tips, i am new, and i love macro photography, this is a great help, thank you for being so generous!!
this morning i have an oppointment with some flowers i will try to put some tips in practice!

[oak3x]

another position i shoot in.check how i use my left index finger and thumb as a sort of tripod.works very well at high mag.

i set the mag i want on my lens..then move back and forth till the subject is in focus

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3119/2568479996_6d10612ce6_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2261/2517921017_84f0e15e6d_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3030/2543607864_3d2428d85b_o.jpg

Simply Amazing... Great Work!

[Digital Aurora Photography]

Hi Everyone,
Thanks for all the great tips on macro photography.
I have one question. I haven't shot macro before and normally I would use a filter to protect the lens I am using. I have a sigma 105mm macro and I was wondering if I should get a glass filter for it?
As most macro photography is performed so close to the subject, I'm worried about constantly getting the filter dirty and having to clean it.

[Lester Wareham]

Hi Everyone,
Thanks for all the great tips on macro photography.
I have one question. I haven't shot macro before and normally I would use a filter to protect the lens I am using. I have a sigma 105mm macro and I was wondering if I should get a glass filter for it?
As most macro photography is performed so close to the subject, I'm worried about constantly getting the filter dirty and having to clean it.

Some do, some don't, myself I Do.

Look at the first message in the protrcive filter FAQ linked in my sig to make sure you use a good quality filter.

[Digital Aurora Photography]

Thanks for your help!

I was also wondering if you could specify a filter which might be good, which allows the hood to then be screwed into the filter.
IE the filter is stackable.
I am looking through the 1000+ 58mm filters at B and H and I can't find one which allows the hood to be screwed in.
Thanks again for your help.

[Digital Aurora Photography]

Hi Lester Wareham,
Thanks for all your help.
I read your filter review (very informative) and I found a filter in my price range.
Thanks for helping out the newbies.

[PiRho]

are you sure your lens hood screws into your filter? not the end of the lens itself? I am not familiar with the sigma 105. all the Hoya & B+H filters I have seen are 'stackable' they have filter threading male on one side and female on the other. hope that helps.

[Lester Wareham]

Some of the slimline filters only have threads one side, if you avoid slimline all should be ok, just make sure the coating is good.

[Ravncat]

I didn't see it mentioned anywhere in the thread - so Here's a tidbit about using Teleconverters for macro.

I occasionally find working with a TC and macro helps me get closer, but you've got to be ready for the TC trade-offs. You'll take an IQ hit, but if your looking at something compositional or you just care about more magnification - The loss of detail can occasionally be an acceptable trade-off.

If for some reason you want to use a Tele-converter with extension tubes - Attach the TC to the camera body, then the tubes, then the lens. This will result in greater magnification than Tubes -> TC -> Lens. It's also going to hurt your working distance, but chances are if you are working with stacked tubes, your WD is already pretty small.