Beyond 1:1...

[roger_shrader]

Waht is the best and most economically sound way to go beyond 1:1

doing Macro Photography? I have read about close up filters,

extenders and the rest, but I am uncertain as to what is going to

yield the best results. Which method is going to maintain sharpness

and clarity? I am not looking to spend a fortune and I am not really

all that concerned with going off the deep end; 2 or 3:1 would be

fine. I am using a Canon Elan 7E and a Tamron SP 90mm AF Macro Lens.

Most of my Macro work is shot using a Manfrotto focusing stage and

Bogen tripod under natural lighting conditions(if that makes a

difference).

[michael_goode1]

A good place to start would be

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/canon/mp-e-65">here</a>.

I've never tried this lens, however it does look interesting.

[fredrick_sears]

You might try the library and look for John Shaw's "Close up in

nature".

 

Reversing lens are a quick and relatively inexpensive way to work

beyond 1:1

[alexandre_vaz]

In theory, if you are looking for a economically solution, then close up lens (diopters) are unbeatable.

 

But if your lens already makes 1:1 it will be difficult to find diopers that will allow you to focus closer. Diopters reduce the minimum focusing distance allowing bigger enlargements

 

(on this Photo.net thread you�ll find the explanation: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001Fl7)

 

To make 3:1 with a 90mm you would need to focus at about 3cm, meaning that a +30 diopter would be necessary.

In this case ether you go for a bigger lens, a different macro lens, or a reverse mounting device.

 

Any way, to find out the diopters available look in here: http://www.angelfire.com/ca/erker/closeups.html

[john_schutt]

Hello.

 

A few posts have mentioned John Shaw. He's changed his techniques since his earlier books. In his latest book (Nature Photographer's Field Guide) he says that he now uses the 105mm micro and the 200mm micro Nikon lenses for his highest extension. They go 1:1 right off the bat. Then, he uses mostly a 2x teleconverter. That combination takes the lenses to 2:1. He says that, while quality really matters on long lenses, it doesn't do as much for micro. He uses the Tamron 2x. In addition to this, he also uses the 17.5 extension tube, the PN-11 (52.5mm) extension tube, and a 3T or 4T teleconverter. He says that you have to mount the 3T or 4T backwards to get the best image quality with the 200mm micro.

[rmohan]

What a coincidence !! Just this morning I did some experiments at home photographing a cactus. Used 100 EF macro at 1:1 + 20 mm extension + 2x will give around 2 times, 1.4x will give around 1.4 times life size. Then I reversed a 24mm prime with 100 at 1:1 to get 4 times life size. In the last combo the viewfinder was so dark that I am sure its impractical in the field to even attempt it. Just to add I used tripod + velbon slider + off-shoe flash + sensia 2@100. Of course I was reading John Shaw last night. It may be a while before I get them developed, I'll post the results when I get it.

[frank_kolwicz]

It's funny what combinations can work for macros: one time, just for the hell of it, I piled all the close-up stuff I had on a Canon 200 Macro and got about 5x at 12 inches to photograph a frog's eye and I couldn't believe that the resultant KM slide was presentable!

 

With natural light, your biggest problems are going to be exposure times and the problems that come with long exposures and viewfinder dimness.

 

One thing, though: the cheap diopters WILL really kill any image quality you otherwise might be getting.

[chuck_greene]

Roger,

 

My 105mm macro lens focuses to 1:1, for greater magnification I use extension tubes and/or a good 2x teleconverter. I generally use TTL flash for magnification greater than 2x life size.