Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Which would be the best lens
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Jun 17, 2014 09:15:05   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
Depending on the camera, tubes will require contacts in order to communicate with the body. Given the cost of tubes so equipped, he is better off saving for a macro lens... Older manual focus ones are not much more than tubes anyway...I have auto tubes & manual tubes & that's my opinion.... Seeing as macro is my niche, I have all bases covered, tubes (both auto & manual), auxiliary magnifying lenses, bellows, reversing rings and AF & MF macro lenses... Bottom line is that the true macro lens, for those who have a decided interest in macro,is the best way to go... Get that first & then dabble in the other methods. To do otherwise may just turn one off to macro shooting as it's not as easy as it looks and other methods have more shortcomings or are just less convenient than a dedicated macro lens.

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 10:51:36   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
terry44 wrote:
I am looking at 105 macro and trying to find an 85 macro wondering which you all think works best or does a 24 mm - 85 mm work for macro shooting, or would a set of the tube extensions work so that I could turn almost any of my lenses into macro thanks in advance for any help.


The 105 has a better working distance than the 85mm. The 24-85 will work for some "macro" shots if the reproduction ratio it gives you is acceptable to you. Although I have an excellent macro lens I find myself using my 70-300 for "macro" work often.
My 28-105 is also very useful for "macro" work since it has a switch that allows the lens to get closer to the subject. It is indeed handy.
The working distance where you will feel comfortable will dictate the focal length that you should buy and I would say 105mm tends to be the standard.

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 11:05:13   #
wingclui44 Loc: CT USA
 
psychusa wrote:
I remember a fellow at another photo site that took some of the best macros I have ever seen with a point and shoot camera. (Think it was a Nikon Coolpix. Forget exactly what model number.) The advantage was the tremendous (relatively) depth of field he got, in addition to being able to get really close. Over the years I have battled the paper thin depth of field problems with my own MACRO lens -- A Canon 100mm. The attached was taken with a point and shoot, with which I actually used to get better results with..
I remember a fellow at another photo site that too... (show quote)


That's true, a P&S camera can give you better DOF, because it has a much smaller sensor, and it doesn't count as true macro (1:1 life size).

Reply
 
 
Jun 17, 2014 11:08:29   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
Not to mention that you have to get up close & personal with the insect, provided they don't flee first...Plus you have the added issue of lighting the scene, not easy being so close.
wingclui44 wrote:
That's true, a P&S camera can give you better DOF, because it has a much smaller sensor, and it doesn't count as true macro (1:1 life size).

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 12:04:53   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
I really like a 70-200 zoom with a +3 diopter 2 element close up lens that will take you to about 1:2 repro ratio without getting close (relatively).

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 12:18:03   #
psychusa Loc: Brooklyn
 
imagemeister wrote:
I really like a 70-200 zoom with a +3 diopter 2 element close up lens that will take you to about 1:2 repro ratio without getting close (relatively).


Yes, I use my long lenses for macro type shots all the time, especially butterfly shots. This one was taken with a 100 - 400 Zoom.



Reply
Jun 17, 2014 13:34:07   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
imagemeister wrote:
I really like a 70-200 zoom with a +3 diopter 2 element close up lens that will take you to about 1:2 repro ratio without getting close (relatively).


Canon 70-200 F4L with Tamron SP 1.4X and Canon 500D close up (+2 diopter) at a marked 135mm .......



Reply
 
 
Jun 17, 2014 13:45:11   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
Nice close ups of the different butterflies....How about checking off the "store original" box so we can pixel peep ?.... I'm attaching an image of a smaller butterfly I got an image of last week & also a Sleeping Bee on the end of a Black Eyed Susan flower petal...Both taken with a mid 1980's 105mm macro lens

American Lady Butterfly
American Lady Butterfly...
(Download)

Sleeping Bee
Sleeping Bee...
(Download)

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 17:10:59   #
psychusa Loc: Brooklyn
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
Nice close ups of the different butterflies....How about checking off the "store original" box so we can pixel peep ?.... I'm attaching an image of a smaller butterfly I got an image of last week & also a Sleeping Bee on the end of a Black Eyed Susan flower petal...Both taken with a mid 1980's 105mm macro lens


Excellent shot of the "sleeping bee", although it might be a dead one, or one wrapped up waiting for a spider to finish it off?

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 17:16:25   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
It's really is sleeping....It's a common way for bees to sleep, I went back out to check on it a short while later & it was gone....I submitted the image to bugguide.net, which is hosted by the Iowa State University Entomology department who verified the activity as well as offering a Latin name for the Bee...
Any time you need an ID for an unknown insect, submit an image to them here... http://bugguide.net/node/view/15740
psychusa wrote:
Excellent shot of the "sleeping bee", although it might be a dead one, or one wrapped up waiting for a spider to finish it off?

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 17:22:04   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
I just posted a series of images of a Thread Waisted Wasp trying to get a grasshopper it caught into a hole & the both of them wouldn't fit...Again, taken with an older manual focus lens... Saves money, when buying the older lenses, for other goodies as the prices are a lot less than current equivalents. That said, the model DSLR you have has a bearing on being able to use them...
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-219789-1.html#3698939

Reply
 
 
Jun 17, 2014 17:27:57   #
psychusa Loc: Brooklyn
 
Great for the bee!

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 17:30:28   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
For that particular one, yes... I have a shot of another one in the same family that got "ambushed" by an Ambush Bug...Ain't nature grand ?
psychusa wrote:
Great for the bee!

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 17:31:05   #
psychusa Loc: Brooklyn
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
I just posted a series of images of a Thread Waisted Wasp trying to get a grasshopper it caught into a hole & the both of them wouldn't fit...Again, taken with an older manual focus lens... Saves money, when buying the older lenses, for other goodies as the prices are a lot less than current equivalents. That said, the model DSLR you have has a bearing on being able to use them...
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-219789-1.html#3698939


Thanks, Scott. I don't even own the point and shoot anymore. Actually use my long lenses for macros now. Get better results than with my dedicated Canon 100mm macro, because this lens lacks IS.

Reply
Jun 17, 2014 17:38:59   #
terry44 Loc: Tuolumne County California, Maui Hawaii
 
I will check it out Thanks for the information
phlash46 wrote:
Nikon makes a very nice 85mm DX macro lens that also has VR. It's not outrageously expensive.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.