Insect Photography Equipment?

http://i50.tinypic.com/24ev13t.jpg
You will almost never be able to get even 1:1 with a bridge camera but using your editor you can crop to do better. on my monitor the bottom fellow is at about x4 magnification maybe more.
A monopod is good becuase an accepted technique is to set the focus and then move the camera in and out to get the focus point you want. You have so little depth of field that firstly while you can use AF to find focus and re-compose with 'normal' shots this is fraught with hazards when really close in. These two shots were 'easy' because what I wanted to be sharp was centre screen so AF was able to do it. But to be honest with you I have included the true focal lengths [35mm equivalents] which goes against my suggestion of the super-zoom camera :-)

Dona,

I just noticed your questions.

Quote:

---

Please can you tell me whether you used extension rings when you captured the butterflies? I have a 100mm macro dedicated lens. Have also aksess to butterflies. But my pictures are no where close to the clearness of your shots. What settings you used?

---

The butterfly I posted was with a 100mm macro and a 36mm extension. The full-boy butterflies on my site were taken with the same lens, but no extension tube. I use 36mm a lot with that lens. I most often shoot bugs with a flash at around f/13 and 1/125 second. f/13 is a reasonable compromise. I want as much DOF as possible, but the more you close the aperture down, the more you get softening from diffraction. I sometimes go a little smaller, say, f/16.

My flash rig is home-made. Most macro photographers make their own. I modeled mine after the one at the bottom of this thread: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=189001. I used a cheap aluminum straight bracket for the bottom. I knocked off the flash head and drilled a hole to mount a mini-ball head. Then I mounted a novoflex mini-ballhead with a panning adjustment. On top of that, I put a very cheap Giotto mini-ballhead. The two ball heads together, if you put them in the right rotation relative to each other, give you a great deal of flexibility. Instead of a large diffuser (which would be better), I made a diffuser from a stofen omnibounce. I added several additional layers of diffusing plastic inside it, wrapped it in aluminum foil to avoid light going to the sides, and then covered the whole thing with two layers of white paper towel.

Dan

Thanks Dan

nikon d7000, sigma 150mm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vespoid

Richard - thanks for the explanation! When I first posted, I didn't fully understand the significance of the 1:1 magnification, but now it's making sense. :)

So that leads me to wondering: what if you want to go to a higher magnification, like 4:1? Is it feasible to do on a lens like the Tamron 90mm? (the extensions I've seen seem to be more in the 36mm range... I was just wondering how you get up to 270mm of extensions? Or do you have to use an actual magnifying lens at that point?)

---

Not mentioned at this stage of the thread is the bellows. This is an adjustable extension tube with bellows like the old-time cameras had. With a short lens, I cannot remember at this stage if it was a 10mm or 25mm off my film camera, I got a 9:1 magnification ... four millimeters on my ruler filling my 35mm camera frame, 36mm across.



People prefer 90mm lens because that is what is available ... whereas using a bridge camera or 'super-zoom' with a moderate close-up lens is yet another approach. Here I am using a 430 or 280mm lens with a two dioptre CU lens enabling me to focus at about 10<12 inches.

The thing to remember in all of this is that you are after a "tight framing" and going in close is not the only way, nor always the best with insects which may flit when approached by a camera and lens.

I was photographing an insect at the house where I am staying just last night and didn't get that close to it but with cropping in editing I may get what I want when I get home. I have found it not bad to stay back a bit and crop in editing if you have the pixels which most if not all cameras have these days. I am currently using a M4/3 camera with the 280mm lens and 2 dioptre [ 500mm] CU lens. The camera is a Panasonic 16Mp GH2. [1:1 on it is a 17x13mm subject ]

Extension is a matter of adding extension between camera and lens ... my favorite example is when I wanted to copy part of a 16mm film frame onto my 35mm camera and using a pair of extension tube sets, on camera and on 50mm lens, I 'coupled them together' loosely with a length of plastic drainpipe. In more recent times I have used my 135mm lens with the two extension tube sets [ about 55mm each ] with the 140mm of my bellows giving me 250mm extension.

EDIT I think some of that is inaccurate but see
http://jcuknz-photos.com/HELP/BELLOWSEXTENSION.html
for details on my website

I looked up from the computer and there were two of these climbing up the window. full frame m4/3 280mm [140 lens] with two dioptre CU lens.
http://i45.tinypic.com/6sawco.jpg

I guess this thread is a bit old but I feel I should put in my 2-bob's worth.

Re tripods, IMO totally useless for insects unless you are out on a frosty morning when they don't move. At any other time you need to be mobile.

I always use flash, the Canon dual macro flash on camera and normally a remote somewhere behind the bug to fill the background and try to reduce the "black background" you often get with flash. Sometime I mount the remote flash on a tripod but normally it's hand-held as well.

I use a 100mm, a 150/180 would be nice for the extra working distance but when holding the rig with one hand it would be too heavy.

Some examples

http://graynomad.smugmug.com/Insects...5453&k=HWbxBk8

Re > 1:1, the higher the magnification the harder it gets. I normally use a small (12mm) extension tube and a screw on 2 dioptre (I think) closeup lens, this give me a range of about 1:2 to 2:1 which I find is good for the sort of subject size I am interested in and I can quickly remove the closeup lens if I find something larger.

And one more thing, any zoom with a so-called macro facility is useless for high-quality macro.

EDIT: And another thing, don't use apertures smaller than about f16, the defraction will kill any DoF advantages.