Macro lens

[alfalfa]

Originally Posted by lauraleellbp

But that's a disadvantage if I'm trying to take pics from just a few feet, isn't it?

The 100 mm is better if you're working outside with wild animals, but the 60 mm might be a better choice for inside work with small pets (like geckos)?

If I was trying to take a macro photo of a wild animal I'd probably want something like 10000mm. Some big differences between macro and normal lenses are the reproduction ratio and working distances. Same focal length - different applications. I could take a picture of my brother from 10 feet away. But to capture his iris with glorious macro detail I'd have to be very close to his face. But as far as getting close, using a regular lens to move in close to a subject does not necessarily mean it a macro lens or a macro photograph, even if it earns a goofy "Golden Star Award for Superb Macro Photograph!" on flickr. Macro is different and it often requires a macro lens.

I had a 60mm macro lens. I had a clear/UV filter of some sort over the front to protect it. I actually bumped into part of a flower (stamen) when I was trying to focus on something inside of it.

I later tried a 105mm macro for greater working distance. That allowed me to be a foot away. It meant I wouldn't bump into anything but it also meant it was still too close to most critters. It seems to be ok for a fish tank but the fish definitely notice it and act differently. I haven't put too much effort into it, but they'd probably get used to the lens being that close quicker than how long it took to get used to my face.

[alfalfa]

Originally Posted by Nubster

I still say that the Tamron 90mm is the best bang for the buck. Used copies can be found pretty easily for around $300. They aren't highend Canon/Nikon but they can certainly hold their own for a fraction of the price.

I've heard the same thing over and over for a long time, too. That Tamron 90mm is supposed to be a great buy.

[reefdive]

Lots of great info here . Anyone ever noticed if the noises every scared the fish or shrimp ? I had a Nikkor 105 D and it was just plain noisy . Might be good for Frogs and reptile's though as they would turn to look at it ( or run away ? )

[alfalfa]

I had the 60 D and still have the 105 D. I have briefly tried a 105 AF-S as a regular lens and loved the AF-S yet I never tried AF-S for macro. As far as the AF version goes, I never use AF for macro. Macro is easier and faster in manual focus. If you don't use a tripod (with or without rails) and turning the ring by hand is too tricky, set the focus within range manually and just lean slightly back and forth to get it just right.

[toofazt]

Nikon D40X, Sigma 150mm Macro lens, Sigma EF-500 Super flash mounted above tank, all shot freehand. Gives you that extra working distance so it works great with bugs too; nobody likes getting too close to spiders! More pics here: http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/sh...rimp-pics.html



Little baby Cherry

[synaethetic]

Originally Posted by toofazt

Nikon D40X, Sigma 150mm Macro lens, Sigma EF-500 Super flash mounted above tank, all shot freehand. Gives you that extra working distance so it works great with bugs too; nobody likes getting too close to spiders! More pics here: http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/sh...rimp-pics.html



Little baby Cherry

Amazing photos!

[Patriot]

For those using a flash mounted above the tank my you show your set so we can learn how to do it? Thank for all the great photos.

[toofazt]

Originally Posted by synaethetic

Amazing photos!

Thanks!

Originally Posted by Patriot100%

For those using a flash mounted above the tank my you show your set so we can learn how to do it? Thank for all the great photos.

I either mount the flash on a tripod or set it directly on the tank (fluval edge) with one of those collapsible diffusers installed.

[reefdive]

I am going to stick my neck out and say lighting is 90% of what is needed to get those great closeup shots . And even multiple lights or flash's . Also taking the picture in the Aquarium will alway be more difficult than a small studio setup . Good natural light from the right direction and fill flash from other angles can give the subject amazing detail . Or all studio light can work as well depend's on what you have available . I know what needs to be done but doing it is another realm of self motivation altogether . A lense can only record what it see's . I love to get new photo equipement but it is lighting equipement we should be getting and the knowledge to use it .

[Mr. Appleton]

Agreed with Reefdive. Especially with macro photography where the depth-of-field becomes vanishingly small it's critical that you bring the light to allow you stop down your lens to attain the depth that you need to have the shrimp/fish/whatever in complete focus.

As for setup, I've found that you can either lay the flash flat directly on the glass top of the aquarium (if you have one) with the bounce card pulled out. That'll let you bounce the flash down. I've also been able to bend the flash and balance it over the edge of the aquarium.

Overall, I've found that lighting will improve your images by leaps and bounds once you have the basic lenses covered. It's a worthwhile to learn skill!

[Patriot]

I finally got my vivitar 70-210mm 3.5 lens I will say that I'm very pleased with the results that I got with it. The bokeh is very smooth and creamy in both macro mode and not. I feature I like about this lens is the macro mode. I want to using it in brighter light to get better results, I got off of work when the sun start setting so bumped up the ISO. I can't wait until the weekend when I'm free. I don't have any shrimp or fish to show off the macro ability though