Close up/macro lens for jewellery

Hi chaps, I have a 5D MkII and shoot some jewellery for an auction house now and then.

I use my EF 24-105 with a 1.4 close up lens stuck on the front, this works pretty well but when shooting rings I need to enlarge quite a bit to fill the frame, anyone recommend a lens that might help ... ?

I don't really want to add an ext tube as the depth of field becomes too narrow ... the 24-105 + lens makes life a little difficult when the client wants to see ring in focus from back to front !

Regards Roger

Would the DOF be too thin even shooting at f/11 or f/16 with a set of tubes or partial set of tubes? If it were me though, I'd probably buy the 100mm macro.

Depth of field is your nemesis and is controlled by three things: lens focal length, lens aperture and distance to the subject. The longer the focal length, the shallower the depth of field. And, the higher the magnification, the shallower the depth of field. The larger your aperture, the shallower the depth of field.

You should experiment with your zoom and combinations of extension tubes, focal lengths and apertures, to find an optimal setting. Personally I'd much rather use an extension tube than a magnifying diopter on the front of the lens, since the added optics always will reduce resolution to some degree. Extension tubes have no optics, so there's little loss of resolution using them.

To get adequate DOF you may have to move back, not try to fill the viewfinder with the subject, then later crop the image for its intended final use. Fortunately with a 21MP camera you should have some potential to do this. How much you can do this really depends upon the end usage of the images... what resolution your customer requires.

Also try smaller apertures... f11, f16, maybe even f22... but watch out for diffraction, which increases the smaller the aperture you use. Diffraction "robs" fine detail from the image. For an 8x10 print (final usage), when shooting with a 21MP full frame sensor the optimal aperture where there's no effect from diffraction is f10... This is called the Diffraction Limited Aperture and any smaller and diffraction begins to have some effect, assuming an 8x10 enlargement made from the image... minimal at first, then more as smaller apertures are used. More info about diffraction and a calculator to determine various format cameras' DLA can be found at http://www.cambridgein​colour.com …ffraction-photography.htm. But you should take a series of test shots yourself, with your gear set at different f-stops, and inspect them closely to see the effect and find the limits for your specific purposes.

Often for small product studio tabletop photography I use Canon Tilt-Shift lenses. The TS-E 45mm and TS-E 90mm are both close focusing and excellent for this purpose. However, they are not really macro lenses, by themselves. The 45mm gives 0.16X (approx. 1:6 or one sixth life size) and the 90mm lens up to 0.29X (close to 1:3 or one third life size). But they can be used with macro extension tubes to make them closer focusing. Canon recommends no more than a 12mm extension tube on the 45mm lens (when used on a full frame camera) which renders up to 0.44X (nearly 1:2 or half life size), while the 90mm can be used with 12mm or 25mm extension tube, for up to 0.60X (nearly 2:3 or two thirds life size).

An advantage of a Tilt Shift lens is that the tilt function can be used to better align the plane of focus with the subject. The shift function can be used to "dodge" reflections, such as inadvertent "self portraits". The current TS-E 45mm and 90mm both come with the tilt and shift axis at 90 degrees to each other, but the lens can be disassembled and reassembled so that they are aligned, if needed (I'd recommend having this done professionally, such as by Canon's service dept.) Tilt-shift lenses are manual focus only, by the way. So you might want to use with Live View (Focus Confirmation can be used, too, so long is the camera is put into One Shot mode).

You might have to employ a combination of these tricks, to achieve true front to back sharpness on a small items such as a ring. In other words, you may have to compromise on the size of aperture, not get too close and crop the image a little, and add some modest extension to a lens such as a tilt shift, with the tilt employed to adjust the plane of focus.

Even then, it might be optically impossible to get an entire ring into focus... But, after all, how important is it that the inside of the rear or bottom of a ring be perfectly sharp? That might even be desirable, to have the inside of the base of a ring slightly out of focus if it's not as highly finished as the top/front portion of the ring.

One method for getting small things completely in focus is called "focus stacking". It can be done with a variety of possible lenses... but is a process where a series of shallow DOF images are taken, each focused slightly differently, and then later combined in software using just the sharpest and most in-focus portion of each. Look at the Helicon Soft website for more info about this: http://www.heliconsoft​.com/

This would add significant post-processing time and effort, but might be the only way to get everything in sharp focus. Otherwise it may be an optical impossibility. If you choose to do focus stacking, you might also want to install Magic Lantern software on your 5DII... It adds a number of features (both video and still related), but key to this purpose I believe the ML firmware "overlay" or "hack" can be used to set up a series of shots at slightly different focus points, to later be combined in the focus stacking software.

Tilt shift lenses and focus stacking softwares aren't cheap. (Note: TS-E lenses often show up on the used market... many pros buy them on the client's dime for a shoot or two, then sell them off since they are fairly specialized lenses). Macro extension tubes are pretty affordable to try... the Kenko set (12mm, 20mm & 36mm tubes) was $179 at B&H Photo when I looked recently. If it were me, I'd explore the using what I've got first, maybe make some examples to show to the client and discuss with them, before investing heavily in some of the more expensive options. You also could rent a TS-E lens for a few days and give it a try. Study up on using them first, though, so you don't spend your entire rental term just learning to use it!

rogertb wrote in post #17105135
Hi chaps, I have a 5D MkII and shoot some jewellery for an auction house now and then.

I use my EF 24-105 with a 1.4 close up lens stuck on the front, this works pretty well but when shooting rings I need to enlarge quite a bit to fill the frame, anyone recommend a lens that might help ... ?

I don't really want to add an ext tube as the depth of field becomes too narrow ... the 24-105 + lens makes life a little difficult when the client wants to see ring in focus from back to front !

Regards Roger

Hi Roger

This photo was done with a TSE 17mm.

IMAGE LINK: http://s1110.photobuck​et.com …0006_zps6c7380b​d.jpg.html

amfoto1 wrote in post #17105580
Depth of field is your nemesis and is controlled by three things: lens focal length, lens aperture and distance to the subject.

DoF is better described by "subject size to image sensor size" and aperture. If you want to take a picture of a particular sized object, and you fill the frame with the object, the depth of field at a given aperture will be the same no matter if you use a 10mm or a 1000mm lens. Background compression will of course vary wildly, but that's not the point. The point is that no matter how you get there, extension tubes, macro lens, wide angle, telephoto, you'll always end up with the same DoF.

OP:
100mm Macro Non-L paired with a tripod and narrow apertures, is the simplest solution and likely more than good enough for what you're trying to do. You'll lose some sharpness to diffraction, yes, but for auction photos you'll be more than fine. Focus stacking would be a lot more time consuming. The tripod will make focusing a lot easier. It can be done with a flash and without the tripod, but you'll likely miss focus a lot. For the best photos, you'd use flash and a tripod of course.

It's tough on the 24-105. The 100mm macro or 100L would work great for jewelry.

vengence wrote in post #17105940
DoF is better described by "subject size to image sensor size" and aperture. If you want to take a picture of a particular sized object, and you fill the frame with the object, the depth of field at a given aperture will be the same no matter if you use a 10mm or a 1000mm lens. Background compression will of course vary wildly, but that's not the point. The point is that no matter how you get there, extension tubes, macro lens, wide angle, telephoto, you'll always end up with the same DoF.

OP:
100mm Macro Non-L paired with a tripod and narrow apertures, is the simplest solution and likely more than good enough for what you're trying to do. You'll lose some sharpness to diffraction, yes, but for auction photos you'll be more than fine. Focus stacking would be a lot more time consuming. The tripod will make focusing a lot easier. It can be done with a flash and without the tripod, but you'll likely miss focus a lot. For the best photos, you'd use flash and a tripod of course.

+1 this. If you are shooting on a tripod, there is essentially zero reason to buy the L, since the main thing it adds is IS. A 100mm non-L macro would be great for this.

I disagree on one point. Focus stacking is generally very easy. If you want to make it extremely easy, you can buy Zerene. Stacking is difficult when there is a big distance between an edge and the surface behind it, which can generate halos that are time consuming to fix, and which are sometimes not entirely fixable. Otherwise, it can be literally a couple of commands.

So here is what I would do:

-- get a 100mm macro lens. you could also get a Tamron or Sigma in that focal length range.

--Start by using a tripod and, say, f/13 to see if that gives you enough DOF. Diffraction won't make a practical difference at that aperture. If that doesn't work, try a bit narrower aperture.

--If that is not enough, try focus stacking in Photoshop (google it). If that solves your problem, you can make life easier by buying Zerene.

I don't do product photography, but I focus-stack macros all the time. To pick an example more or less at random, here is a seed pod that I am guessing was probably 1 inch (2.5cm) long:

Thanks one and all for such comprehensive responses, especially 'amfoto' that really has given me a lot to chew over and increased my knowledge of the subject ... all replies have made me really give thought to the various options. The shot from 'farmer' is stunning but the TSE 17mm option is a little expensive, a lot more than I earn from this client in a year !
... also the padler's 'stacking' idea's good but there really isn't enough time (or budget) in 'post' - however a lens in the 90-100 mm range seems like a possibility and it has the advantage of being usable, not only for the jewellery shoot but I could try more close-up stuff for my own 'pleasure' and it seems they make good portrait lenses ... I've had a look around and as padler said there's a Tamron, Sigma and Canon to choose from and they're all just about within budget if I can find a good used one especially !

Again thanks to everyone.

Roger

BTW anyone recommend any one of these: Tamron 90, Sigma 105 or Canon 100 ... I'll be doing some research online but any comments from you chaps, with first hand experience, would be very welcome.

paddler4 wrote in post #17106301

I can't get over how great this image is.

rogertb wrote in post #17108883
BTW anyone recommend any one of these: Tamron 90, Sigma 105 or Canon 100 ... I'll be doing some research online but any comments from you chaps, with first hand experience, would be very welcome.

they will all work fine for jewelry pics with the right lighting

the old Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro non-di is sharp and often less than $200 (used)


Rebel XSi /450D
Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro non-di

amazing info. thanks for sharing!

If your working with a tripod, and need some working distance for proper lighting, I would recommend avoiding anything shorter than 100mm. This is why I didn't like the EF-S 60mm macro at 1:1 when I had it.
With that said. The older Canon 100mm macro 'NON-USM' and amazingly sharp lens.
However if you're shooting live subjects or working handheld, the 100L IS is an amazing lens.
Those are the only reasons I got the 100L, my older 100mm macro was just as sharp optically.

I can also state that the Canon nonL USM is a fine lens. I would pick this one for jewelry photos, since it doesn't extend as you focus closer. I also have a Sigma 50 F2.8 macro lens, and while sharp, there isn't sufficient working room for lighting, as you approach 1:1.
The current non-l macro is very sharp. If you have money to spare, the L adds IS, but you won't need that when the camera is on a tripod.

artyH wrote in post #17203430
I can also state that the Canon nonL USM is a fine lens. I would pick this one for jewelry photos, since it doesn't extend as you focus closer. I also have a Sigma 50 F2.8 macro lens, and while sharp, there isn't sufficient working room for lighting, as you approach 1:1.
The current non-l macro is very sharp. If you have money to spare, the L adds IS, but you won't need that when the camera is on a tripod.

Gotta agree... for jewelry you can and should be using a tripod. IS, which is of minimal help at high magnifications anyway, isn't needed.

Note: Canon's Hybrid-IS on the 100L macro was especially developed for macro and is likely the best on the market. However, when making higher magnification macro shots, don't expect more than about one stop's worth of assistance from it, even if it is the best. Other manufacturers' stabilization give virtually no assistance at 1:1 magnification.

Regarding DOF... extension tubes on your 24-105 would be no different from a macro lens. If you add a 25mm extension to your 24-105, it can do 0.60X or a little better than half life size (1:2). Without any extension, the lens' max mag is 0.23X (less than 1/4 life size, so that's a significant increase. With 36mm tube, it could give more, while 12mm or 20mm tubes would give a bit less (the Kenko tube set included 12mm, 20mm and 36mm... Canon sells only individual tubes in 12mm and 25mm lengths).

If you were to use the 24-105 + 25mm tube at any particular aperture and at it's closest possible magnification, the DOF with 100mm macro lens set to the same level of magnification and aperture will render exactly the same DOF.

Focal length, aperture size and distance to the subject are the key factors effecting DOF. DOF can get incredibly shallow at very close focused, macro magnifications. This was shot with Canon 180mm near 1:1 magnification, and as you can see DOF is very shallow, the sharp plane of focus is only a couple mm...