Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

The camera, macro lens, flash.
If subject is sedentary 1 tripod will do in addition.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

The only thing that changes is the angle of view. There is no change in the minimum focus distance or the focal length of the lens.

JoeM845

If you are shooting critters in your house you need:

1) Something to contain them.
2) A tolerant wife (spouse?).
3) A budget for roses.

After that, it is want.

I don't know how you learn, but consider a book or some Internet searches on specific shots. You have enough equipment to get started. Dive in!

Try a few things. See what you can do with what you already have. Get feedback on your captures. Some questions to keep in mind:

How many macro/close-up pictures have you tried to take?
How many of those were difficult or impossible because of some equipment lack?
Why was each specific shot difficult or impossible?
What could you do, or did you do, to get around the equipment lack for each of those shots?
Was the process of rethinking those shot satisfying?
Do you notice a large proportion of shots that could be improved by the same piece (type?) of equipment?

Have fun!

therwol Loc: USA

The focal length doesn't actually change. The minimum focus distance doesn't change. The narrower angle of view means that you don't have to be as close to the subject, so you get one of the advantages of a longer lens.

photogeneralist Loc: Lopez Island Washington State

A subject.

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

Your macro lens and flash are all that's required to create stunning images of a seldom seen world. The key is to get the flash out to the front of the lens and to set it to a low power (duration) of somewhere between 1/32 to 1/8 power. Set the flash sync speed to match your camera's ability for that will allow you to set your aperture and shutter speed as high as possible. Aperture setting is typically between f8 and f16 however there are quite a few variables to be considered. If the aperture is set too high you may encounter diffraction which will produce halos or fringing in your image.

Keep your ISO as low as possible 100 or 200 is mostly ideal for noise becomes very pronounced at magnified views where it may be undetectable for non-macro shots.

If you want to get more magnification out of what you already have, consider a reversing ring to "put your lens on backwards" It will produce something quite a bit more than the 1:1 ratio when mounted normally. Extension tubes are very reasonable but they do reduce the available light so keep that in mind.

Shoot in the manual mode and lean yourself forward and back to obtain focus. Don't become discouraged if several of your images are out of focus for even seasoned macro photographers get far less good shots compared to those that are misses.

The depth of field in macro is razor thin so seldom will the entire image be in sharp focus so aim for the point of interest, like the insect's eye, and the rest will fade out of focus naturally. Focus stacking will produce tack sharp images from edge to edge and some cameras have the ability to do in camera stacking however focus stacking is a topic in itself and there is a wealth of informative tutorials on YouTube.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

Sounds like you have what you need, just a camera and macro lens. You will probably want to hand hold for what you are looking to photograph. Maybe a macro light in the future?

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

The advantage is not great. A comparison with a 55 f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor AI and M2 extension ring on a DX and FX camera, with a 34mm wide subject filling both frames, shows that the actual working distance with the DX camera is only about 19mm more than with the FX camera. For active subjects, I would prefer a longer lens with either format.

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

No doubt about the advantage of having a longer working distance for photographing insects. I started out with a 60mm, then went to a 105mm and ended up with a 200mm (all macro lenses). I use them all now however each has its own best place.

The 60mm is great for flowers and inanimate subjects for it allows for pleasing compositions with its wider field of view and it is a joy to carry. The 105mm is good for flowers and not-too-shy or non-stinging insects. Great for a carry around fits-all macro lens and super for portraits too.

The 200mm is my insect hunting lens. It gives me more distance which makes them less shy for I can stand back from them a bit. I suspect that it all looks pretty intimidating when the flash and diffusers are coming close to you. I also do a lot of bees, wasps and hornets which I find to be quite fascinating in many ways and the 200mm gives me a minimum focus distance of 18-inches (and the lens weighs 2.5 lbs.) whereas the 60mm has a minimum focus distance of 7-inches (and weighs 1.3 lbs.)

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

I am using a 60mm lens on a crop frame camera D7200 that gives me an effect 90mm. To expand that even more would it make sense to crop even more to give me an effective 120mm or would quality suffer?

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

I use a Nikon D810 full frame camera. The difference in sensor size provides a different field of view between the two. I think of it as though I were looking through two different size tubes. The center of the view is the exact same clerity. One just shows more of it. The Nikon D500 fellows love the performance of this crop sensor camera and it is one of the highest rated cameras for action and wildlife and it outperforms the $6,000 flagship D5 dollar for dollar (wish I had one).

When I crop my images with the full frame camera I end up about in the same place as a crop size sensor and I simply throw away pixels. In fact, a crop size sensor has more photosites on the sensor than the full frame does. I find the difference to be more on the opposite end when enlarging an image where a full frame camera has more pixels to cover the area. My first full frame camera was a Nikon D3 which was 12 megapixels and it performed like a Rock Star. I only traded it because it did not record video (I wish I had it back).

I also shoot macro with a Fujifilm X-T20 which is a crop sensor camera and with my mount adapter I put all of my Nikon macro lenses on it and I can't tell the difference between them (other than size and weight).

Here's a little chart for various sensor sizes based on the same scene and I've included a picture of my insect hunting rig.

(Download)


(Download)

therwol Loc: USA

The ability to crop and get good results will be the same for any given camera. What is your experience with cropping "normal" photos you take with your camera? With any camera, you can reach a point where it matters, but 24 megapixels is pretty generous and should give you some leeway, especially with such a sharp lens.

Having said that, you should make use of your entire sensor (little or no cropping) when possible for best results, but that may involve using more than one lens for different circumstances. I agree with everyone who said that you should start with what you have and see if it gives you what you're looking for before even considering anything else. I think that eventually you may want to look into better lighting/flash options.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

Thanks to all. A lot of information to digest and implement. I am thinking of going to a 1/3 crop for outside shooting to turn the 60mm into an effective 120mm. I know my field of view shrinks but I think I'm willing to live with that for the additional reach. Comments?

therwol Loc: USA

I have a Nikon D810. I don't do any pre-cropping in my camera, such as putting it into the DX mode. I may do some cropping after the fact if I don't have a lens long enough with me. I think you'd be better off using your camera and lens combination as is. You'll have more flexibility in cropping after the fact. You may not want to crop all of your pictures.

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

I agree 100% with keeping the Nikon D810 in the FX mode (why not if you are using a FX macro lens). Fill the frame with the subject as much as possible and then crop to suit in post processing. Even with a 1:1 macro lens there is often too much other "stuff" in the image even though the point of focus is on the eye of the subject so if you want the tiny Aphid to stand out filling the frame then the only option is to crop the image around it and resize the remaining image.