Macro lens in the field

[Matt Jones]

Gents,

I’ve only shot a macro lens in studio but am planning on renting one for a trip to Mexico next week. Questions:

1) Which macro would you recommend for a Canon 5D or 30D for scale shots, eyes, gills, fins, ect.?
2) Having never shot in the field with a macro, is it possible to pull of great macro shots without a tripod?

Any other suggestions you might have, I’ll take them. I’ve always wanted to get the detail of fish anatomy and am super excited about it.

Thanks!

Matt

www.mattjonesphotography.com

[Mike Anderson]

My first choice would be the 100 L. I own the 100 non L and it’s an awesome sharp lens but if I were just renting one I’d do the L.

[John Bennett]

Having never shot in the field with a macro, is it possible to pull of great macro shots without a tripod?

Yes its very possible. I never shoot macro with a tripod. Its just way to difficult and takes much time to get everything “set up”. Example. How will you get a fish to hold perfectly still (and due to the razor thin Depth of Field) your subjects have to remain perfectly still while your setting up and dialing in critical focus (theres no margin of error).

Which macro would you recommend for a Canon 5D or 30D for scale shots, eyes, gills, fins, ect.?

A macro lens is a macro lens. Without splittng hairs, practically speaking the only difference between them is their focal lengths (50mm,60mm,100mm,150mm,180mm).

The difference in focal length determines how much “working” distance you have to play with when shooting at 1:1. The greater the focal length of the lens, the more working distance you’ll have.

For rough example (dont quote me, Im estimating).

I have a 180mm. Its minimum focus distance is I think 19 inches give or take.

a 60mm ( Im guessing) will have a minimum focus distance of 6 inches.

any picture taken will look identical. The only difference is with one lens the front element is 19inches away and with the other 6 inches away.

Bugs, fish, etc,etc tend to get nervous when theres big black eyes moving in so close. So “generally” speaking people appreciate the extra working distance.

The extra working distance (focal length) you have to pay for.

ALot of people like Sigma’s macro lenses. Both the 105mm and 150mm. A good compromise between focal length and price relative to Canons/Nikons Macro lenses of the same focal length.

[J A Y M O R R]

John pretty much nailed it Matt.

[willmilne]

Given you are on Canon you might also consider the 65 MPE Canon which goes beyond 1:1 . Up to 5:1 I think but can also be rigged to do sub 1:1 –

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/924853

Nikon uses (me ) are jealous of this lens :))

If you are planning on working without a tripod you may want to consider the addition of a diffused flash as main or fill and get the fastest shutter speed you can as a basic principal.

Will

[Brett Colvin]

Tokina ATX 100AF Pro.

Hand held:

[willmilne]

It occured me after being out for a walk earlier there is also an other approach that cuts against the grain that you might like. Using wide angle primes in the macro range.

John pointed out that focal length is generally a matter of working distance – greater with longer lenses and closer with shorter lenses. There is however another consideration and that is the degree of isolation from the background that is created. Longer lenses tend to give a greater sense of isolation and shorter lenses less so.

I dont know how things work with Canon but on Nikon manual focus wide angle lenses with extension tubes are a superb option for close up work. The focus range is so limited that you just set the lens on inf or closest mark depending on the look you want and “rock back and forth” acheiving focus with the viewfinder and fire away.

Not fly fishing related but – Orchid seed pods – each approx 5 mm long with a 20 mm f2.8 and 14 mm extension tube and balanced flash-

same setup except with an 8 mm tube with an Orchid about to bloom –

both hand held – working distance approx 2 inches.

hope that helps

Will

[John Bennett]

Tubes are another option. I use 12mm occionally with my 85mm.

Without getting into long dry mathematical discussions. Tubes act similiar to a projector screen. That is, the further away from the sensor (the screen) the front element gets (the projector) they “increase” magnification without light loss or hits to IQ as with TCs.

I forget the actual equation but I think its focal length of tubes divided by focal length of lens. So 25mm in tubes in front of a 25mm lens its still 1:1…But 50mm of tubes in front a 25mm lens magnification increases by 2:1. Alot of bug shooters use a reversed 50mm+100mm 1:1 macro and then 56mm in tubes to acheive 3:1 ratios. I know a guy that uses over a 100mm tubes on a reversed 50 for 6:1 or more.

As Will said they also greatly reduce the lenses MFD. The trade off is they also prevent the lens from focusing out past a certain point. Basically creating a bracket where you can focus on a subject.

WA lenses inherantly make things “close” appear larger than they are and things in the BG appear smaller than they are.

Hence the popularity with some photogs of making fish appear much larger than they are by using a WA and have the “grip and grinner” thrust the fish towards the camera.

So a WA in conjuction with a tube can/could be a neat little close up lens but I don’t that you would be able to make small bugs and the like fill alot of the frame….dunno

[Mike Anderson]

I’ve been researching ways to make my 70-200 shoot better up close so it’ll make a better do all lens. I’m having a hard time finding a place for the 70-200 in my line up. The Damsel flies I posted earlier were shot with that lens but I just can’t get it to make tack sharp close in images like my Macro can. I’ve read that this lens has a bad tendency to back focus when you shot very close to the MFD. I’ve also read that I could put a diopter on it and make it a better macro. I’ve decided to just take along the right lens for the job. I may trade the 70-200 for a 180 macro or the 300 f4.

[kenny smith]

@Brett Colvin:

[J A Y M O R R]

105mm 2.8 Nikon Macro hand held:

[Brett Colvin]

@Kenney: Thanks man I appreciate the comment.

[Matt Jones]

Great info, guys. Awesome shots as well. I will be sure and let you guys know what I end up going with, and I will definitely post pictures when I return.

Depending on the internet connection down in Punta Allen, I will try and make a daily blog post with a few photos.

Thanks again,
Matt

www.mattjonesphotography.com

[Author]

Posts