well braced monopod/handheld grasshopper shot: the masked avenger

[Dave Humphries]

Dan if I understand you then even a monster like the Tamron Telephoto SP AF 180mm f/3.5 Di LD IF Macro Autofocus Lens for Sony Alpha & Minolta Maxxum Series is going to need extension tubes. It would allow me (force me) to shoot further away but not improve my magnification.

Correct, as Dan says, they are virtually all 1:1 magnification.

If I also understand you correctly extension tubes are the next level up and I should stick with the basic macro lens until I get good with it?

Yup.


You could use extension tubes on your current lens, but it will be much more convenient, for a given level of magnification, to use a Macro lens.


Early you asked:

Any idea what would be the minimal macro lens that would allow me to capture the cross hatched texture of an insects eye?

That depends on the species and the lighting angle - as well as magnification - not to mention both you and the subject remaining still enough to resolve it - I'd say it is not impossible, but in most shots, you'll see just hint of it.

Some compound eye images are actually produced by scanning electron microscopes.

By the time you have enough (macro lens) magnification to see this, you are liable to have such a thin DoF that only a small section of the eye will be sharp enough (unless focus stacking) to see the structure of the compound eye.

HTH, Dave

[JBW]

Correct, as Dan says, they are virtually all 1:1 magnification.



Yup.


You could use extension tubes on your current lens, but it will be much more convenient, for a given level of magnification, to use a Macro lens.

no way. Have you seen this shot taken with a Tamron 90?

[Dave Humphries]

~ Have you seen this shot taken with a Tamron 90?

Yes I did and very good it is too, more than I could achieve now, that's for certain.

That orchid is a focus stacked shot Brian - and while you may progress to that in time, that's not something you're going to produce straight away on receipt of the lens. I'm just trying to set reasonable expectations.

[JBW]

Yes I did and very good it is too, more than I could achieve now, that's for certain.

That orchid is a focus stacked shot Brian - and while you may progress to that in time, that's not something you're going to produce straight away on receipt of the lens. I'm just trying to set reasonable expectations.

My expectations are very honest: the Tamron is the tool that will allow me to reach the next level. But no quest is attained without effort.

[DanK]

Dave beat me to it. yes, the longer lens will give you the same magnification. However, I think Dave answered a different question about tubes. He suggested using a macro lens rather than your current lens with extension tubes. I agree. However, your question, I think, was about extension tubes with a macro lens. You understood my suggestion about this correctly. I would start with a macro lens by itself. Down the road, when you are really comfortable with it, you could consider adding tubes to it. It took me quite a while to get to that point.

My experience was exactly what you expect. Learning to use a macro lens was a lot of fun, but it is hard work, and it produces a lot of frustration along the way. Well worth it, in my opinion.

Re the photo: it's a wasp, not a fly, although I have no idea what kind of wasp. There are several clues. First, look at the antennae. They are long and cylindrical. They are paddle shaped on most flies. There are two wings on the side facing the camera (although one is broken and harder to see). Flies, unlike most other insects, have only two wings total. The two missing wings are replaced by small spherical appendage called halteres. Finally, look at the eye, which is long, narrow, and positioned toward the side. This is characteristic of wasps, bees, and ants. The eyes of most flies are much bigger and come around to the front. I will post a fly below for comparison.