Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use a Sigma 105mm macro, but for insects, also use two 200mm manual focus lenses:

1) A Canon FD 200/4 1:1 Macro lens with an URTH FD to L adapter.

2) A Novoflex 200mm f3.3 'squeeze trigger manual focus' lens with Leica R extension tubes and R to L adapter  – it's a scarce but superb '3 element achromat' "telescope" (as distinct from "telephoto") lens for c/u photography.    

I've used the Canon FD 200/4 macro for over 40 years. IME manual focus can be better than AF for c/u / macro imaging – especially when using magnified live view – which was not an option in the film era – but now makes manual focus macro imaging so much easier.  The additional lens to subject distance when using a 200mm lens for close-up photography can be very useful when photographing timid fauna, e.g., lizards, butterflies, damselflies.

It's worth checking out the Photomacrography Forum to see the types of close-up lenses used by expert macro enthusiasts. One of the most popular 'manual focus' macro lenses used by those forum members is the 'manual focus' Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 1-5x Macro Lens – as used by Rick Littlefield who designed his Zerene Stacker software 

https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=47414&p=298494&hilit=65mm#p298494. .... 65mm Canon MP-E pix

https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=7880&p=47921&hilit=65mm#p47921https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/.  65mm Canon MP-E pix

https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=47753

 

Edited by dkCambridgeshire
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 21 Minuten schrieb dkCambridgeshire:

IME manual focus can be better than AF for c/u / macro imaging – especially when using magnified live view

I agree with that, but not for any moving objects like small critters.
I use manual focus when i shoot dead stuff, but it simply does not work when object is moving around.<
And yes, as longer focal distance is as less critters get scared, abover the surface, under water 105mm is about max reasonable length
Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, PhotoCruiser said:

I agree with that, but not for any moving objects like small critters.
I use manual focus when i shoot dead stuff, but it simply does not work when object is moving around.<
And yes, as longer focal distance is as less critters get scared, abover the surface, under water 105mm is about max reasonable length
Chris

Play the % and take lots of images of one creature and some will be acceptably composed and sharp 

It's amazing what can be achieved with simple Raynox supplementary close-up lenses when manually focusing & stacking moving insects 

https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=47576

Edited by dkCambridgeshire
Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer to flash the eyes of the critters as less as possible to protect their eyes, so i use AF to make the shooting less painless than possible.
But everybody has his one believes and ways to achieve what he wan't.
Chris 

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 18 Minuten schrieb jaapv:

You could try a permanent LED ring light to spare the eyes of your victims. 

Good point; Yes, i have one but need to experiment with it but i guess i made a dumb decision and inside diameter is a bit on the small side but now there are much more useful ones available. Best would be using ambient light but that is not always doable and the flash make the colours pop and rise exposure time.
From my underwater work - where i am also instructor of -  i am used to use flashes and use them as less as possible.
Chris

Edited by PhotoCruiser
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There is a small issue with auto focus that one needs to be aware of. If in the optical path there are some moving items like leaves and branches there is the chance that the focus jumps onto these and you lose the picture. So if it is not too critical from a speed point of view Manual focus is not the worst thing if in body stabilisation adds to the stability of the whole set up. There’s a considerate amount of pictures if you shoot with macro or large zoom lenses that you lose on this effect and you cannot judge on this in the store but only in the field. It also depends a little bit on the combination with the body, as it’s different with 601, SL2 and SL3 but when you’re really out in the field, this matters and manual is extremely more safe using a depth of field approach

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply.
I usually use the smallest point AF and move the camera in case the critter moves too, that helps after my experience.
I rarely do flowers with rapid movements, most are critters who move slowly what makes focusing more simple.
Chris
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...