macro or tele lens for shooting insects?

genewch wrote in post #2012356
Do you use a tripod or monopod to take insect macro pics? I think some kind of support is important to me because I'm shakey at a short shooting distance. My breath may even blow the bug away.

Like most people I am largely handheld, almost all insect I shoot are loose in the wild and I try not to interfer with them. If there is a support to lean on do so and get at least one knee on the ground.

I do use a monopod, particularly above life size, although this is not always possible.

The reasons for support are more for focus accuracy rather than camera shake control, so this is even need with flash.

A monopod is handy to take some of the weight also, camera+lens+flash often held in odd positions, possibly with arms extended due to undergrowth getting in the way soon gets heavy.

I never use a tripod with insects, only flowers and fungi etc. The only way a tripod can effectivly be used with insects is if you find them early in the morning when they are too cold to fly or move fast. Else in the evening when they are looking to settle for the night. Otherwise a tripod is a recipe for frustration.

Other things that are handy:
An angle finder (Canon angle finder C recommended)
A tough waterproof groundsheet about 2X2 ft to kneel on and give protection from stingers and thorns.
A Wembly Plamp to steady branches etc.
Small scissors for minor gardening away grass stalks that are in the way (without damaging the bugs environment)
If working in available light a grey card for custom white balance as AWB is miles off when the whole frame is filled with green (I'm always too excited to remember this).

genewch wrote in post #2012356
Do you use a tripod or monopod to take insect macro pics? I think some kind of support is important to me because I'm shakey at a short shooting distance. My breath may even blow the bug away.

I use a tripod as often as I can. It will give sharper pictures if you want to make big enlargements. Sometimes a tripod is too awkward to use or inconvenient to carry and I shoot hand held, but find that it limits the possibilities because you have to keep the shutter speed fairly high which means you can't use as small an aperture as you would like to get enough depth of field for macro shots.

Well to me one of the most important reasons to use, say a 100mm macro,as opposed to a 200mm or 300mm is the difference in shutter speed you can safely handhold.If you say youre having problems with shake youre not using a high enough shutter speed.With a 100 2.8 you should have no problem shooting at 125th in any reasonable light,whereas it maight be harder to get 250th or 500th in a low light setting.

What about something like a sigma 70-300 APO macro lens (I am looking to buy.) Would that be an afforderable choice for some sports, insects, birds and maybe animals at the zoo perhaps?

GrendelZ wrote in post #2015360
Well to me one of the most important reasons to use, say a 100mm macro,as opposed to a 200mm or 300mm is the difference in shutter speed you can safely handhold.If you say youre having problems with shake youre not using a high enough shutter speed.With a 100 2.8 you should have no problem shooting at 125th in any reasonable light,whereas it maight be harder to get 250th or 500th in a low light setting.

True, this is why I tend to use my 300 f4 IS with tubes rather than my more compact 200 f2.8 when I want larger WD.

I have often gone on record that an IS macro lens may not be that useful, for the 180 it would help a lot. I still have reservations about any detremental effect on sharpness due to the high demands macro lenses make.

What I have noticed with longer lenses for macro work is it becomes increcingly difficult to find the subject in the viewfinder, not only in angle but depth too at modest magnifications. You get the same effect with the MP-E, so the issue is probably one of focal length times magnification.

I recently did some shots of Migrant Hawkers that were so difficult to aproach I ended up using the 300 f4 IS with a EF 2X, much harder to locate them but fortunatly as long as they are undisturbed they stay put if maiting.

Thanks for all these precious experience and opinions. A monopod might be of most help to steady the camera. Is a flip lock monopod less favourable than a screw lock one? The noise on closing the flip lock may scare away the insects or small creatures. Also, is the lens hood too offending to these small bugs/animals?

Use a hood, they won't see the difference but you might. 300/4's hood is built in.

genewch wrote in post #2017246
Thanks for all these precious experience and opinions. A monopod might be of most help to steady the camera. Is a flip lock monopod less favourable than a screw lock one? The noise on closing the flip lock may scare away the insects or small creatures. Also, is the lens hood too offending to these small bugs/animals?

You tend to find yourself adjusting height quite a lot so a leaver lock is probably faster. I'm using a Manfrotto 694 Magfibre 4 Section Monopod with a lightweight Velbon PH-253 ball and socket head which also has a leaver lock action.