[Closed] Photoists -anyone into macro photography -advice on kit please.

Afaik, tubes come in different lenghts, and ideally you want to be close to half the focal length of the lens you want to use. Some lenses work well with tubes, some don't, do some googling.

The expensive ones have electronics in to communicate with lens and body for autofocus or aperture control. However a cheap option might be to get a cheap old manual focus prime, with a mechanical focus mechanism and aperture ring, then a 'dumb' tube which are only a few quid on ebay. However you may not get enough change out of £80 to make it worthwhile doing that.

If you really want to get into it then a tripod with a tiltable centre column like the Benbo Trekker or Cullman Magnesit 528Q is a must I reckon for non-studio stuff. Incredibly useful bit of kit, I've no idea why all tripods aren't made this way (I've got the Cullman one). Also macro focusing rails are handy but I've managed to amuse myself so far without.

Have you considered the Tamron 90mm instead. A bit of a legend amongst macro photographers and I think cheaper than the Canon offering.

Can't comment on extender tubes as haven't really ever had anything to do with them.

Cheers

Danny B

this one?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamron-AF-90mm-2-8-Di/dp/B0002232ZG

Looks good. But it doesn't have a red ring 🙂

Seriously though, will consider it as its half the price of the canon L glass.

Sorry I can't comment on the tubes either, but what sort of macro do you want to do?

Bugs and creepy crawlies might be difficult with tubes due to how close the lens needs to be to the subject so they will be scared off, I have the EF-S 60mm macro and getting close enough to insects for 1:1 images is very hit and miss (unless you're happy to chill them of course) or pick something slow moving;

[img] [/img]

As mentioned the Tamron is well respected, and the older Canon 100mm (the non L version) was/is excellent if you can find one second hand. The MP-E65 is also an amazing lens, but expensive and very niche.

I was looking at [url= http://www.amazon.co.uk/Polaroid-Focus-Extension-Digital-Cameras/dp/B004VNBAT2 ]these[/url] forever ago, but never quite pulled the trigger. They were about the cheapest active tubes I could find.

If you're happy with manual everything and passive tubes, it's worth noting that the extension tubes don't contain any optics at all; so build quality aside there's no point in throwing money at them, one manufacturer's fresh air will be as good as another's.

The Tamron lens is a great lens for the cash alternately extension tubes and a 50mm 1.8 to have a go on the cheap with decent results.

BTW before I got the Tamron I used Jessops auto extension tubes that looked identical to those Polaroid ones that Cougar linked to with good results

I had a lot of fun building my own macro lenses. Results were pretty average, but the components are dirt cheap on eBay:

[url= http://www.monkeyonabicycle.com/2010/10/diy-macro-photography-i-enlarger-lens.html ]Attempt #1[/url]

[url= http://www.monkeyonabicycle.com/2010/10/diy-macro-photography-ii-reversed.html ]Attempt #2[/url]

Can also buy an adapter ring to literally use the lens back to front, seen some good results from them too [url= http://www.srb-griturn.com/reversing-rings-629-c.asp ]Reversing Ring[/url]

I do have the lens you referred to and worth saving for, got lucky with an Amazon misprice earlier this year. Ended up paying £405 after the Canon cashback, doesn't get used much though and hardly ever for macro

doesn't get used much though and hardly ever for macro

selling it then?

Reverse ring, extender tubes, cheapo manual 50mm prime from ebay.
My set up cost me about 15 quid.

Probably harder to take shots than with a normal macros but possibly more fun.

[url= http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2447/3648798356_f07b515983_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2447/3648798356_f07b515983_z.jp g"/> ?zz=1[/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/53067724@N00/3648798356/ ]Waiting[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/53067724@N00/ ]Jon Wyatt[/url], on Flickr

[url= http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4081/4757546178_993ae63d1d_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4081/4757546178_993ae63d1d_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/53067724@N00/4757546178/ ]105-micro[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/53067724@N00/ ]Jon Wyatt[/url], on Flickr

more advice? Get absolutely as much light as possible in there if you're using extender tubes, you lose a huge amount.

More? Alive things move about a lot, dead things don't. If you want to take a good picture of something small that's alive, kill it first. Nobody can tell the difference 😉

Oh, I don't use my budget macro set up any more, you're welcome to have it if I can find it.

you're welcome to have it if I can find it

"have it" as in "Free"?

Yep. drop me an email on samur2@hotmail.com to remind me and I'll have a look tonight.

Don't be expecting anything amazing though, it really is macro kit on a budget but it's worth giving it a try to see if you can get on with focusing on things backwards by moving the camera back and forwards half a mill at a time. It'll at least let you know if you want to spend some money on a proper macros lens.

I could be wrong but I was under the impression that the non-L 2.8 100mm Macro was as near as dammit as good for half the money. No IS but you'd be on a tripod anyway?

Do you really need the Red Ring? Read reviews and try and take some test shots with the L series the non-L as per GL above and the Tamron and see which one you like best...

Cheers

Danny B

What Samuri said. You can get a set of "dumb" macro tubes (£10) and an old 50mm prime lens (£20), one that has a manual aperture ring. Then you'll need to get the filter thread diameter of that lens and buy an adapter for that size in a Canon mount (£5 ish).

You can get some extreme macro shots with this setup but it does take a bit of patience to get it right. And you'll need a flash gun too if you haven't already got one., but you'll need a flashgun anyway to get any kind of depth of field in your macro shots.

And it helps if you've got Live View.

I could explain why in a lot more detail but i'm not going to rabbit on in case you already know what i'm talking about.

Some stunning photos there, gents!
Can't say I'm too fussed about getting into proper macro, I just use the macro close-up setting on my Lumix TZ30, it gets some reasonably decent results, for me, anyway:

[IMG] [/IMG]

[IMG] [/IMG]

This 6-Spot Burnet moth was blowing around in the wind, several inches either side, so getting the photo was an excercise in patience.

[IMG] [/IMG]

The Marsh Helleborine is about a centimetre or slightly less across.
Getting enough light on the subject when you're about an inch or so away is, as someone said, crucial; I try to rely on only sunny days...

I'm a big fan of 90 or 100mm macro lenses; I used to use a Tamron on my T90, and now use the Canon L on my 5D, but I like them because they do macro [i]as well as[/i] being very capable for other purposes. It's certainly been proved above that extension tubes and other budget configurations will get you stunning true-macro images, but not being able to focus to infinity, not to mention loss of automatic control, does make them rather specialist. I had an extension tube with the Tamron and only used it once because I didn't have the patience to get the tripod out the cupboard and put the invertebrates in the freezer. It's just nice to be able to take decent close-ups of plants or whatever with the same gear you're using for just wandering around taking 'normal' shots, I think. All depends how much planning you put into your photos really.

I got the Tamron 90mm macro earlier this year from One Stop Digital for £243.
It's a great lens.

+1 on the Tamron. Might dig it out this weekend.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Further to the above I have been trying some stuff out with the lens 7 tube provided by samuri, and I also ended up getting some powered extender tubes to work with my 18-55, here are some results, not great, but I am still learning:

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

excellent!

Hmm, this is tempting me to dig out my old Minolta macro setup:

[url= http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2283/1809954729_9b45d1513b_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2283/1809954729_9b45d1513b_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/cycleologist/1809954729/ ]Macro Setup[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/cycleologist/ ]Ben Cooper[/url], on Flickr

Used to get pretty good results with it:

[url= http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1169/1397544812_e704d0d015_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1169/1397544812_e704d0d015_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/cycleologist/1397544812/ ]Chrome Hoverfly[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/cycleologist/ ]Ben Cooper[/url], on Flickr

[url= http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1090/1205206726_18fa04d9de_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1090/1205206726_18fa04d9de_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/cycleologist/1205206726/ ]Fly on yellow flower 2[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/cycleologist/ ]Ben Cooper[/url], on Flickr