Options
macro test
My friend Dave asked me about macro photography, and the different lenses, extension tubes, etc, so I went out in the garage today and put this together for him.
Please note I have to individually upload each photo with each post having one photo, so please don't post until you see 7 images from me. This will take me a few minutes. Thanks!
The first shot gives you a pretty normal view of the subject matter, and was taken with the 100 mm 2.8 macro lens.
Please note I have to individually upload each photo with each post having one photo, so please don't post until you see 7 images from me. This will take me a few minutes. Thanks!
The first shot gives you a pretty normal view of the subject matter, and was taken with the 100 mm 2.8 macro lens.
0
Comments
I haven't used the tubes very much, but I have found they seem to work better with some lenses, than others, As for hand holding, this was taken with strobes. Using the 50 mm and 2 tubes because of the VERY narrow min / max focus distance it would be almost impossible for me to hand hold with natural light.
Using the tubes with the 100 mm macro lens seems to ba a good combination.
Sam
Not sure I understand the comment about DOF on the 50mm vs the 100mm lenses with ext tubes though. The DOF at any given magnification and aperture should be the same no matter how you actually achieve the magnification.
brian V.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lordv/
http://www.lordv.smugmug.com/
Brian!!!
Thanks for stopping in! Please understand I consider you the all time macro master. Your macro images are amazing!
I wasn't talking about DOF, but was trying to explain the very narrow range between the maximum focus distance, and the minimum focus distance when using tubes.
As an example when using the 100 mm 2.8 macro lens, I can see, through the view finder a distant mountain. I can also focus on it and take a shot. The mountain of course will be fairly small in the frame.
Still using the 100 mm 2.8 macro lens I could then walk up to the mountain, and take a shot from 12". In this case only a very small section of the mountain would be in the frame, but would of course fill the entire frame.
I am assuming I have light, and a reasonable shutter speed.
Now when using the 50 mm 1.8, with extension tubes, I can't even see the mountain (subject) at a distance. I have to be very close. Depending on the tubes I may only have a range of 1" between the minimum, and maximum distance I can actually see the subject. Within that 1" distance window I might only have a range a 1/4" where I can achieve a focus lock, and take the photo.
To summarize: tubes are relatively cheap, but have limitations, and are harder to use. True macro lenses while more expensive are much more versatile, and easier to use.
I hope that clarifies what I was trying to say.
Sam
Did you use two flashes for all these shots? It looks to me like the first few you had two flashes, later ones, maybe, just one broad light source.
Extension tubes limit the range of distances the lens can focus through with the lens own focusing ring range. As the extension tubes get longer and longer, you get less and less range of focus with the lens focusing ring as you pointed out. You lose the ability to focus to infinity whenever you use an extension tube.
Using a 12mm or 20mm extension tube on a telephoto can be a great way to shoot close ups of insects or flowers - think 300mm + 12 or 20mm extension tubes. You will get nice close ups of butterflies this way, with very lovely out of focus backgrounds, and you stay far enough away to not upset your quarry.
Extension tubes are a nice addition to a 100mm macro or a 180mm macro also.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Thanks for your input.
I used two equal distant strobes at about 30 degrees. This was meant to be a simple flat non creative example to demonstrate the type of results, (FOV, and magnification), you could expect using the combinations tested.
I kinda like the one shoot taken with the 50 mm, and tubes. I couldn't get the tripod height adjusted to where I could get a focus lock, so since I was using strobes I thought I would try hand holding, but I needed some support so I rested my hand on the table to get this shot.
Thus providing a more interesting angle.
I tried to explain the concept, but your sentence: "Extension tubes limit the range of distances the lens can focus through with the lens own focusing ring range. As the extension tubes get longer and longer, you get less and less range of focus with the lens focusing ring as you pointed out. You lose the ability to focus to infinity whenever you use an extension tube." was succinct, and far clearer than my attempt.
Sam
Thanks for the series of photographs. I learn quite a bit from your macro demonstration.
I do have one question about the second photo. You said "This is with the 100 mm lens at the minimum focus distance." That has me somewhat confused.
I'm only curious and don't intend to step on any toes, especially being the new guy. I was just curious about that specific point.
Thanks for the test!
William,
First, don't worry about stepping any ones toes, we are all here to, learn, and exchange our experiences.
Four posts eh? I'm sitting here LMAO. I tried to do this test in between other chores, and rushed things a bit.
When I was taking the first image labeled as min focus distance, I kept thinking to myself, gee this doesn't look right. I thought I could focus closer, and have the subject fill the screen more.
After reading your post, I went and checked the lens.
Sho nuff...........it were set at to the 0.48m rather than the 0.31m, minimum focus distance.
So the posted test is officially bogus! The ruler, and buttons should all look bigger in each photo. I can't do the math, but all should be larger / closer.
Good catch!!!
Sam
PS: I am happier now with the lens then I was. :-)
So - are you happy enough to re-do the test??? Might take you a while to reset all the stuff to the exact same positions, but this is important stuff:D
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Thank goodness I've NEVER done that! :bs
Ditto to Icebear.
I was going to write that the first image did not seem quite right and it did not look like a macro lens at minimum focusing distance. until I saw your explanation.
I do have a question about the 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens you were using.
I use a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 SP AF Macro lens and when I start focusing as close as a bit over 3 feet, the focus scale begins to show the ratio at which I am shooting. It starts at 1:10 and works its way (1:7, 1:5, 1:3 and so on) closer until at .96 feet it tells me that I am at a 1:1 image ratio. I deem it very handy to have this scale as a reference because I know at what ratio I am shooting without looking at a chart or doing any math.
My previous macro lens was an old Vivitar Series-1 90mm f/2.8 Macro. It didn't have the image ratio on the focus scale although it could focus to a 1:1 ratio (using an adapter like the 50mm f/2.8 Canon Macro lens does).
I assumed that the ratio scale was an addition that most new macro lenses included. Seeing your post, I begin to wonder if the 100mm Macro includes the image ratio on the focus scale.
Yes the Canon lens has that stuff, and if I had paid attention I wouldn't have %#$*-up! But I did. :cry
I admitted it. I ate a bucket of worms!. I will self flagellate myself this evening after I find out were to buy the cat o nine tails whip. Unfortunately for me, here in California, they probably carry them at Wal Mart.
Sam
The 100mm Canon f2.8 macro does indeed show the 1:1 1:1.2 1:1.5 ratios in yellow numbers right in front of the focus distance in feet and meters.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Oh, so that's what those numbers are for.
I've been using mine for closeups and not real macros, so they weren't of much use to me - I just frame the part of the flower the way I want it to fill the frame.