Jump to content

What Sort Of Camera Is Good For Close-Up Photos?


Daddy-O

Recommended Posts

As stated, the camera is probably the least important component in the setup to taking a good macro shot. Technique is paramount. Using natural light whenever possible makes a huge difference. If you have manual control of the aperture and focus, that is ideal. A tripod is s must for sharp photos. Use the built in timer or a remote release cord to minimize camera shake which is more noticeable in macro work.

 

My typical setup is a Sony Alpha-700 DSLR, Slik U-212 tripod, remote release cord, and a Minolta 100mm f2.8 Macro lens. I use a simple sweep made of heavy white paper with a white bounce reflector utilizing only available natural light.

 

attachicon.gifimage.jpg

 

attachicon.gifimage.jpg

I like your "Plamp" for holding the foamcore reflector. The Plamp is a great accessory for hold reflectors or small objects being photographed. My wife uses one to hold her roses steady when photographing them outside.

Edited by Tasmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • KBeezie

    7

  • redisburning

    2

  • sargetalon

    2

  • Tasmith

    2

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Taken with a Canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens and a Canon 6D body.

 

 

 

When taking macro shots with a DSLR, I always turn the "Mirror Lock Up" setting on. This causes the mirror to go to the up position when the shutter release is pressed. Wait a few seconds for any vibration from the movement of the mirror to go away, then press the shutter release a second time to expose the image.

 

With mirrorless cameras, this is not needed.

Edited by Tasmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With mirrorless cameras, this is not needed.

Though the option is still there (shows as a little diamond next to the shutter release options), mainly I guess to reduce vibrations caused by your hands hitting the shutter button (which is what a remote release was used for most of the time).

 

The 100/2.8 Macro was one of my favorites when I was still shooting with Canon.

 

But far as shutter speeds go, if you're using a flash source, you usually want to use the highest X-Sync possible (like on mine it's 1/200th). The flash exposure will be primarily dependant on the aperture/iso, but setting the shutter as high as it can go for flash exposure helps eliminate any ambient room light from polluting the image with a different color balance (lie the lamp across the room, etc).

 

If you're shooting with continuous light, you either want to have all the bulbs at the same color balance in the room, or turn off all the lights except the ones you're using to shoot with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

macro really is the realm of SLR cameras, along with autofocus tracking it is one of the things that the camera type is really the best at. well, other than a monorail but that's way beyond the scope of even most photographer's needs/wants.

 

Leica was mentioned earlier in the thread. I will enthusiastically second that, my two Leica macros (60mm Macro-Elmarit and 100mm APO-Macro-Elmarit) are still at the top of the heap optically and work fantastically for macro work from a usability perspective on Canon cameras. I also love my Olympus macros (50 and 90 f2) and I can recommend (ish) the Zeiss 50 Makro-Planar which while nice sort of just sits in it's box as I reach for the OM50 or Leica 100 the vast majority of the time. I use these as general purpose lenses.

 

Ultimately, for the web, resolution doesn't matter much, but color, distortion and your ability to physically use the lens (focus properly, control aperture) are all best done with the older manual focus macros IMO, which work best on a full frame camera which sort of limits your options:

8683394941_44cd8e7c64_b.jpg

15680949451_d78c6674b4_b.jpg

 

one of these lenses costs 16 times what the other one cost me. which one was it?

Edited by redisburning
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting how you can pick up a good quality macro lens for a film camera for next to nothing these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like your "Plamp" for holding the foamcore reflector. The Plamp is a great accessory for hold reflectors or small objects being photographed. My wife uses one to hold her roses steady when photographing then outside.

 

Thanks. I bought a pair of Plamps many many years ago and have found them incredibly useful for macro work over the years.

PELIKAN - Too many birds in the flock to count. My pen chest has proven to be a most fertile breeding ground.

fpn_1508261203__fpn_logo_300x150.jpg

THE PELIKAN'S PERCH - A growing reference site for all things Pelikan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

macro really is the realm of SLR cameras, along with autofocus tracking it is one of the things that the camera type is really the best at. well, other than a monorail but that's way beyond the scope of even most photographer's needs/wants.

 

Leica was mentioned earlier in the thread. I will enthusiastically second that, my two Leica macros (60mm Macro-Elmarit and 100mm APO-Macro-Elmarit) are still at the top of the heap optically and work fantastically for macro work from a usability perspective on Canon cameras. I also love my Olympus macros (50 and 90 f2) and I can recommend (ish) the Zeiss 50 Makro-Planar which while nice sort of just sits in it's box as I reach for the OM50 or Leica 100 the vast majority of the time. I use these as general purpose lenses.

 

Ultimately, for the web, resolution doesn't matter much, but color, distortion and your ability to physically use the lens (focus properly, control aperture) are all best done with the older manual focus macros IMO, which work best on a full frame camera which sort of limits your options:

8683394941_44cd8e7c64_b.jpg

15680949451_d78c6674b4_b.jpg

 

one of these lenses costs 16 times what the other one cost me. which one was it?

The bokeh is much smoother on the top one, but it's also quite a bit different viewing distance. But essentially with a silky change in the top flower implies that there's more aperture blades than the lens used to shoot the bottom one. (but they could also be the same lens, one shot wide open and the other with the blades stopped down a little giving the bokeh some shape.)

 

:P

 

But ya it's nearly impossible to tell web wise, especially if you shot in raw at a low ISO to begin with (thus eliminating some of the noise and color degradation). But it's also the reason why I always edit in 16-bit mode from the raw file even if my target is just an 8-bit jpeg intended for the web. Gotta start off with more details and data in order to preserve most of it in the final.

 

PS: You don't *need* full frame, especially with the older lens. They do give you more coverage which is useful if you're doing landscape or architectural work. But for close ups and portraiture range, with a good sensor the cropping of older 'cheaper' lens narrows it down to the higher quality portion of the glass, getting rid of the edge distortion you'd get from putting cheaper glass onto a full frame camera.

 

Also with a full frame body you wouldn't be able to take an old lens and turn it into a tilt-able lens on a mirrorless system.

 

But far as cost. The Sigma 60/2.8 was only about $230 new (the 30/2.8 of the same series about 199) for my Olympus E-P3 (Micro-4/3)

 

http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2013/271/d/7/p9276005_1280_warm_by_kbeezie-d6ochmy.jpg

Edited by KBeezie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

I'm not happy with the blurry FP photos I take on my mobile phone and my old digital camera is even worse. There is no way I can take a picture of a nib with any definition. What sort of cameras do you use and are they reasonably priced?

 

Mark

 

You can get an old Olympus E1 with a 50mm macro lens for a song these days, from Keh (no affiliation); it's all a question then of controlling the light.

"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."

 

B. Russell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can get an old Olympus E1 with a 50mm macro lens for a song these days, from Keh (no affiliation); it's all a question then of controlling the light.

Can also get an older E-P3 w/ the original 17mm f/2.8 kit lens for around $300 or so (as opposed to the current E-P5 replacement of around $900), then if you don't mind using older manual focus lens you can get something in a Pentax K, Canon FD, Nikon AI, Minolta MF etc and just pair it up with an adapter that fits micro-4/3rd. Not autofocus or auto-stop-down, but that's rarely an issue when you're working in a controlled studio-like environment.

 

Due to the shorter registration distance of the micro-4/3rd format, a lot of lens can be adapted to it (preferably if they have their own aperture ring on it, as newer electronic lens need the electronic contacts, or you're just shooting wide open all the time.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said, any camera - provided it has macro capability - can do the job. I do have a Nikon D700 and also have a couple of macro lenses, but when I have to get really close, I often prefer a Canon G12 compact camera which functions much more uncomplicated in macro mode. Of course the resolution is not the same as the D700, but depending of the desired size of the finished picture, a very high resolution may not be needed either. The far better low light capabilities of the D700 is hardly relevant because I consider the use of a tripod to be mandatory. A fountain pen doesn't move much by itself so one can safely use very slow shutter speeds. If one wants great out of focus rendering (good "bokeh"), a dSLR with a good macro lens will be better than a compact camera, which often doesn't have good bokeh and also has too wide depth of field to get those dreamy out of focus effects. One of the all time bokeh kings was the old Nikon 105/2.5 AI-S, but it's not a macro lens, so it will have to be fitted with extension tubes to get close enough. The Nikon 55/2.8 macro AI-S lens is great - and cheap in the second hand market - but those old manual focus lenses will not work with light metering on all modern Nikon dSLR bodies. BTW, NEVER use anything older than AI/AI-S lenses on a Nikon dSLR - they can damage the lens mount on the camera (the exception is "AI'd" older lenses - that is rebuilt to AI specs, a service Nikon provided back then).

 

Apart from the cameras macro capabilities, I consider the light to be much more important than the camera. It need not be sophisticated, but some kind of home made light tent is useful. I remember a watch afficionado at one of the watch fora who shot the most magnificent photos of watches using a simple compact camera and an old white opaque plastic bucket as a light tent. His "painting with the light" was the key factor. Also keep an OCD like cleanliness. Even the tiniest dust specs are very visible in macro photos. Fingerprints will also show.

Edited by Oldane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, NEVER use anything older than AI/AI-S lenses on a Nikon dSLR - they can damage the lens mount on the camera (the exception is "AI'd" older lenses - that is rebuilt to AI specs, a service Nikon provided back then).

Some of the newer cameras such as the D40 and onward (D40 isn't "newer" per se but most of the Nikons in that price range from the D40 and after), lack some of the mechanical connections to use the manual focus lens, and will in some case actually error saying no lens attached, thus requiring a more expensive Nikon DSLR just to use the older lens, or if you get an older autofocus lens, it won't be able to focus it because the motor drive connection has been removed from the lens mount (again more expensive model to use it).

 

So something to keep in mind of course. Most of the mirrorless systems with an adapter will fire and meter regardless if it detects an electronic lens or not. You just have to manually control the focus and stop down the aperture manually before shooting if you're adapting. (you can also adapt Nikon lens to the Nikon 1 mirrorless, but their lens mounts are not very strong so be careful, might snap the mount right out of the camera).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you should be care repurposing lenses into macro capability with other lenses or extension tubes.

 

at the very least you should adjust your expectations. a 100 dollar 50/3.5 macro from the 70s will laugh at 2k zooms at 1:10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you should be care repurposing lenses into macro capability with other lenses or extension tubes.

 

at the very least you should adjust your expectations. a 100 dollar 50/3.5 macro from the 70s will laugh at 2k zooms at 1:10.

Most larger zooms are meant for telephoto distances with their "optimal" focusing distance being further than the range you would normally use for macro work.

 

My Tamron 90/2.8 1:1 Macro lens is basically a hair trigger on focusing on anything that's further than 10-15 feet away from me (meaning a slight nudge on the focus ring changes focus quite a bit), but that degree of change is very useful when I get to less than 6 feet away allowing me very fine tuning on the focus when I'm getting close to an object, and it's sharpness is optimal at those focusing distances as that's what it's made for.

 

When I see some of those zooms that go from a wide to telephoto, advertises macro capabilities (which can mean 1:5 or even 1:10 as you said, and still count as 'macro'), it reminds me of the phrase "Jack of all Trades, Master of none". At least the 2K zooms are good for what they're made to do, but a 2K Prime (one single focal length) would do even better at the same price :D.

 

My old Jupiter-11 135mm f/4 lens (russian lens mand for the Leica screwmount) when adapted to my Olympus can't focus any closer than about 12 feet in front of me, but it has EXCELLENT sharpness for anything I want to shoot further away even wide open at f/4 (wide open tends to be a 'soft spot' for most lens, usually gets sharper if you go down a stop or two, such as f/5.6 or f/8 being a stop or two from f/4).

 

By the way I think you're talking about the old Canon FD 50/3.5 Macro lens. It's 1:2 (half life size) at it's normal focal length, but had an extension tube that was made specifically for that lens to get it to 1:1 lifesize (but it also reduced the effective light, so it's effectively f/5.6 @ 1:1). But that lens was also designed to allow extension tube stacking up to 3x life size, that's when you need strobes and a sturdy tripod :D, but it would be AWESOME, like you got yourself a microscope.

 

The adapter to fit a Canon FD lens onto a mirroless micro-4/3rd body (olympus, panasonic, ricoh, etc) would run you about $50 if you want one from Fotodiox (has an "open close" ring, so you can quickly open and close the aperture to it's preset setting as opposed to having to click down to it and check where you have it), down to about $8 for a generic one on ebay.

 

I think when you start getting at lifesize (1:1) or greater, you really should be manually focusing with a tripod anyways.

 

The other thing to consider. If you have a lens that's very sharp at 100% crop, you can always shoot at the highest megapixels, and then crop down to get closer to the pens. You only need about 2Megapixels for web-use (1600x1200 at most, I usually resize down to 1280x960 or 960x720), so you could shoot at 12, 16, 22, etc and crop down to get in closer, provided that the details are acceptable at 100% zoom. If they are, that'll save you some money on a lens in the mean time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Most Contributions

    1. amberleadavis
      amberleadavis
      43844
    2. PAKMAN
      PAKMAN
      33501
    3. Ghost Plane
      Ghost Plane
      28220
    4. inkstainedruth
      inkstainedruth
      26627
    5. jar
      jar
      26101
  • Upcoming Events

  • Blog Comments

    • Shanghai Knife Dude
      I have the Sailor Naginata and some fancy blade nibs coming after 2022 by a number of new workshop from China.  With all my respect, IMHO, they are all (bleep) in doing chinese characters.  Go use a bush, or at least a bush pen. 
    • A Smug Dill
      It is the reason why I'm so keen on the idea of a personal library — of pens, nibs, inks, paper products, etc. — and spent so much money, as well as time and effort, to “build” it for myself (because I can't simply remember everything, especially as I'm getting older fast) and my wife, so that we can “know”; and, instead of just disposing of what displeased us, or even just not good enough to be “given the time of day” against competition from >500 other pens and >500 other inks for our at
    • adamselene
      Agreed.  And I think it’s good to be aware of this early on and think about at the point of buying rather than rationalizing a purchase..
    • A Smug Dill
      Alas, one cannot know “good” without some idea of “bad” against which to contrast; and, as one of my former bosses (back when I was in my twenties) used to say, “on the scale of good to bad…”, it's a spectrum, not a dichotomy. Whereas subjectively acceptable (or tolerable) and unacceptable may well be a dichotomy to someone, and finding whether the threshold or cusp between them lies takes experiencing many degrees of less-than-ideal, especially if the decision is somehow influenced by factors o
    • adamselene
      I got my first real fountain pen on my 60th birthday and many hundreds of pens later I’ve often thought of what I should’ve known in the beginning. I have many pens, the majority of which have some objectionable feature. If they are too delicate, or can’t be posted, or they are too precious to face losing , still they are users, but only in very limited environments..  I have a big disliking for pens that have the cap jump into the air and fly off. I object to Pens that dry out, or leave blobs o
  • Chatbox

    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More
  • Files






×
×
  • Create New...