macro photography of ants

hello

 

i was interested in buying a nikon d80, mainly to take macro photographs of

ants for articles on biology

 

do you think it's a good choice? do you have any suggestions?

what lenses would you recommend?

 

let me explain a little better:

i need a powerful macro with a big field depth.

for example, in this shot http://www.theteh.com/html/3rd_350d_54.html, there is

too little on focus.

i needed something that could show detail on the leaf as well as on the ant.

also, it would be great if i didn't need to stand so close, so i don't

accidentaly frighten the ant.

 

thanks in advance

The D80 is a great camera, you could also consider a used D200 which would give greater flexibility with older MF lenses.

 

'i needed something that could show detail on the leaf as well as on the ant', 'also, it would be great if i didn't need to stand so close' - these statements are mutually exclusive I'm afraid - Macro photography is all about trade-offs; In order to get max DofF you need wider lenses, in order to keep your distance from the subject you need longer focal length lenses! Most people opt for something in the 105mm range which will give you something around 6 to 8 inches working distance from the front of the lens when used at 1:1 (lifesize). You will struggle to get much greater depth than shown in that shot, whichever body you opt for.

 

Here is a link to an article that will allow you to calculate D of F for different lenses, appertures etc. http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Optical/Depth_of_Field_01.htm

The Nikon D80 will be fine. In the picture you showed, it would have been possible to have a bit more in focus with a smaller aperture, but, with a sufficiently small aperture, the image quality of the fly would suffer. The only Nikon macro lens which would help with having more of your image in focus is the 85mm PC Micro. It is expensive, but it will allow you to use <i>tilt,</i> a special technique you will have to learn, which will put more of the image in focus. The trouble with this is that it takes a bit more time, you you run more of a risk having the ants move away from where you want them.

<br><br>

A new camera, the D300, may work even better for what you want because you can see the image in the LCD display as you are deciding what parts will be in focus. However, it is more expensive (currently around twice the price of the D80) and significantly heavier than the D80. I haven't tried it, but there are now many on photo.net who have. You know your budget, I can only suggest what might work.

I should have said that Autofocus is of little use in macro, you will need to focus manually when in close.

 

You may find the Sigma 105mm Macro would suit your needs, all the Sigma Macro lenses are superb. http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/macro/macro.htm

Um, few people here are biologists, of the biologists few are entomologists, and of the entomologists few are ant specialists. Why don't you find a specialist and ask it what it does? You'll get an answer that reflects good practice, not one that's largely uniformed guesswork. If you can't think of anyone who can advise you, beg E. O. Wilson for directions to someone who can help you. And if you don't have a copy of The Ants, buy one.

 

Since you don't know enough to your question well, you might want to read a book on the subject and think hard about what you're trying to accomplish. I'll suggest two books. Field Photography, by A. A. Blaker and The Manual of Closeup Photography by Lester Lefkowitz. Blaker is stronger on photography in general (I think you need to learn more, so get it) and on closeup (magnification <= 1:1). Lefkowitz isn't as good on basic photography -- he assumes that you know that already -- but is stronger on photomacrography (magnification > 1:1) and that's what shooting ants requires.

 

People here will chime in with recommendations of John Shaw's book Closeups In Nature. I have it too, it won't help you at all with ants. The $5 I spent on it was $5 wasted.

Ants are quite small, but your big depth of field is not going to be easy to attain. It is

dependent on magnification and aperture, but the problem is that once you get below f11

or maybe f16, diffraction will increasingly degrade resolution. So you can have sharp

images with modest DOF, or mushy images with lots of DOF. There's no practical way

around this other than stacking multiple images with specialized software (or maybe using

a scanning electron microscope).

 

I know this is a Nikon forum but if you are starting from scratch, you should at least

consider a Canon instead. The reason is the Canon MP-E 65, a highly specialized macro

lens that gets from 1:1 to 5:1 (5X life size) with no attachments. At the moment, Nikon

offers nothing similar. With a good macroflash (ringlight or twinlight), the MP-E 65 is

probably the least painful way to get good high-mag macros.

 

Downsides: (1) expensive, especially with the almost-absolutely necessary macroflash (2)

hard to focus, especially at high magnifications (3) at 5X the front of the lens is only about

an inch or so from the subject.

 

Just a thought...

You picked a very challenging topic. Your main limitation will be shooting technique. If you desperately need the large depth of field any decent macro lens will do because it will be limited by diffraction. So despite the excellent advice given above you will need to practice and just start with any macro lens at 90-200mm focal length. Nothing beats trial and error after the advice you got here.

 

A while ago I saw quite a few excellent ant shots in the gallery of these www pages. Try to find those and contact the author. Perhaps someone here remembers these better.

 

But you get lucky - as the old saying is : fruit flies like banana and ants do as well :-P

The question seems kind of backwards. I'd determine which lens does what you need to do, then buy the camera that fits it.

The Manual Of Close-Up Photography by Lester Lefkowitz is a great reference. Find a used copy for a few dollars from an internet bookseller. Most close-up photography is done with macro lenses in the 50-55 or 90-105 range. These can be very nice even down to 1:1 but ants are quite small. To shoot them you might need 3X or 4X or even more magnification. My best outdoor ant photos were taken with a Konica FT-1. The camera had been disassembled and fitted with a nikon E screen, a grid type. The lens was a reversed 28mm f/3.5 Konica Hexanon with an Auto Ring and double cable switch. Lighting was from a small electronic flash on a bracket attached to the hot shoe. Each time you shoot with an Auto Ring you must cock the ring because you are getting semi-automatic operation. Just before the shutter fires the lens closes down to the pre-selected aperture. Before you can take the next shot you muct re-set the Auto Ring. Depth of field is shallow but you can use a small aperture and you must try to keep the most important part of the subject parallel to the film plane. The speed of the flash will freeze your subject.

 

Auto focus at these magnifications will not help you. The standard focusing screen won't help you either. You need a grid type or plain matte screen. If you are really interested in insect photography you might consider a Canon DSLR instead. Canon makes a very interesting macro lens called the 65mm f/2.8 MPE. With a full frame DSLR like the 5D you will be able to get to 5:1 with the MPE lens. Canon DSLR cameras with smaller sensors will give different magnification factors but the MPE lens is uniquely suited to this kind of high magnification work.

 

The problem with using longer lenses for macro work is that you need much more extension between the lens and the camera body. There are 200mm macro lenses available too but they are rarely used for 5X magnification.

<I> With a full frame DSLR like the 5D you will be able to get to 5:1 with the MPE lens.

Canon DSLR cameras with smaller sensors will give different magnification factors but the

MPE lens is uniquely suited to this kind of high magnification work.</i><P>

 

No, not really. 5X magnification (5:1) is 5X magnification, no matter what camera the lens is

mounted on. On a small-sensor DSLR, you simply see less of the image circle than with a

5D, 1Ds, or other full-frame camera.

I think I need to add some explanation concerning magnification. This is an often misunderstood area where different formats are concerned. If I am using a 35mm film camera and I am shooting a subject which is 10X15mm at 1:1 then the subject will show up on film as a 10X15mm image. If I could leave the same lens in place but somehow replace the film chamber with a back that takes 8X10" film, the image area on that 8X10" sheet of film would still be 10X15mm. In this example, using the larger piece of film will not get me any improved image quality because I am enlarging from the same size image area on the film. Most macro photography with film cameras was done with 35mm equipment because it was flexible and allowed a photographer to do very high magnification work with less cumbersome equipment. Medium format equipment can be used for macro photography but to gain the advantage of the larger image area the magnification must be higher.

 

If I shoot a 24X36mm subject at 1:1 with a 35mm camera I will have an image on film with a size of 24X36mm. If I shoot that same 24X36mm subject with a 6X45 camera I will need to go to almost 2X (2:1) to fill the viewfinder. The 65/2.8 Canon MPE lens can be used on either full frame sensor or small frame sensor Canon DSLR cameras. All other things being equal, if you fill the frame with your subject using a full frame sensor Canon DSLR you will get higher image quality than if you use the same lens with a small frame sensor Canon DSLR. I still think that the MPE lens is better suited to ant photography than any Nikon macro lens which you might use with a Nikon full frame sensor DSLR or small frame sensor DSLR.

 

The last consideration is image quality at high magnification. The test reports I have seen for the MPE lens show that it is even sharper at 5:1 than it is at 1:1. The images I have seen from this lens have also been very nice.

<I> The test reports I have seen for the MPE lens show that it is even sharper at 5:1 than it

is at 1:1.</i><P>

 

FWIW, that hasn't been my experience with the MP-E 65, and simply from the rules of

diffraction, it seems unlikely. Maximum aperture at 5:1 is more like f11 or f16 (even at 1:1

it's not f2.8 -- that's a theoretical aperture for the non-existent infinity focus). Stopping

down further than f16 increases diffraction rapidly.<P>

 

It's certainly a very sharp lens IF your images are not degraded by vibration, not-quite-

right focus, or diffraction, all of which are very serious challenges at high reproduction

ratios (for me, at least). The viewfinder is very dim at 3:1 or higher magnifications. A

rock-steady support is practical for an inanimate subject, but ants move. And as I

mentioned earlier, DOF is miniscule at 5:1 and attempting to improve it by stopping down

will put you into diffraction limitations quickly.<P>

 

A couple of images of small jumping spiders with the MP-E and a macro ringlight (hence

the funny reflections in the eyes). These are at reproduction ratios of roughly 2.5:1 to

3.5:1:<P>

 

<center>

<I>Habronattus pyrrithrix</I> (probably)<BR>

<img src="http://faculty.ucr.edu/~chappell/INW/arthropods/RFJS5.jpg"><P>

<I>Thiodina hespera</I><BR>

<img src="http://faculty.ucr.edu/~chappell/INW/arthropods/yellowjumper4.JPG"><P>

 

</center>

 

All that said, I still think the MP-E 65 is still the 'easiest' way to get higher reproduction

ratios than 1:1 in a 'standard' macro lens.