[Susinok]

OK background. I have never owned a tripod until recently, and I find working with it for macro much more frustrating than using hand held. I am so used to moving around to get different angles and getting closer, moving back, moving to the side. Plus changing the height for the various plants really annoyed me after a bit.

I did use it for an entire session the other evening after work and did get some good pictures. However, the next evening I did not use it and I liked the pictures I got more than the ones taken with the tripod. The best shots of each session were equally in focus. The wind was breezy both evenings (I'm in Oklahoma after all...) so I doubt I could have seen much difference either way.

Maybe a tripod and macro just isn't right for ME? I'm taking it to the lake today to take some landscape stills. We'll see how I do with it for that application.

Do you use a tripod? Why? Why not? When/where is it's best application for macro photography? I'm going to keep working with mine.

[Nass]

If you're stacking or using natural light I'd tend to use a tripod. Flash, don't need.

[Susinok]

If you're stacking or using natural light I'd tend to use a tripod. Flash, don't need.

I am not stacking. I have not gotten into trying that yet, but that would make sense. Problem is if the wind is blowing (which is always), stacking would not work, even if the camera were perfectly still.

[schnitzer79]

basically what nass said. if you use flash then that will freeze motion anyway. if you're happy both ways just do what suits you best. i mostly use my tripod with landscapes and shutter speeds slower than 1/30th.
i also use it more for macro stills than for insects. its much easier to go handheld with insects. by the time you've set up the tripod you're bug has disappeared

[jmerchant]

for me, it's either hand held or tripod. just depends on where i am and what i'm shooting. obviously shooting bugs and other things that might move a tripod probably isn't feasible. anything that isn't going to move, i try to use a tripod...i like lower ISO, which usually puts me at a slower shutter and I don't want to hand hold for that.

[Not a Number]

A person that I know that does lots of macro photography of plants in the field uses a light tent (constructed from PVC pipe) and a tripod. The tent provides even lighting and a wind break.

I do macro photography of small flowers. For handheld shots I'll use Tv mode and not use a shutter speed of less than 1/100th or flash. If detail is absolutely the priority I'll bring the plant (potted) indoors and use a tripod - lighting either from the window or flash (softbox, whitebox). It is usually easier to move the plant around than to reposition the camera and tripod.

[Nass]

I person that I know that does lots of macro photography of plants in the field uses a light tent (constructed from PVC pipe) and a tripod. The tent provides even lighting and a wind break.

Ditto! I just use an eBay softbox with bits cut away, works great! Wind is the enemy!

[bluestringer]

I don't use one for macro, just gets in the way, and takes too long to setup when chasing bugs. I handhold using a Sunpak ring flash.

[tuggie76]

I don't use one for macro, just gets in the way, and takes too long to setup when chasing bugs. I handhold using a Sunpak ring flash.

I have found focus peaking on my K30 is amazing, with a tripod you can tell exactly what's in focus, and a dollar store clear umbrella makes a great diffuser/windbreak. Not much help with bugs, but great for static subjects.

Tuggie76

[MikePerham]

I use a tripod all the time. You get to learn your equipment and can frame the shot in your mind before setting things up then require a minimum of adjustment. Also, I find DOF is so critical and I use the DOF preview a lot, hard to do unless you camera is stable. Also, I shoot at the lowest ISO so shutter speeds tend to be slow. In most cases, I use MLU and a cable release. Here is an example, this one 1/60 at f8.0 @ ISO 100 with a 105mm macro lens. I also find that using a tripod forces you to be more deliberate, look into every corner and and compose your picture better.

[photolady95]

Bugs in the wild and a closeup/macro setup and tripod do not mix well. I never use a tripod for my macro work. That might work if you bring the bugs inside as I have known other photographers to do, but not me, I like my bugs/insects in their natural habitat.

[pericombobulation]

I use a tripod for subjects which don't move - after all, why not? I think most people underestimate the effects of motion blur... end up blaming the lens or camera for lack of sharpness when in fact the camera and/or subject were moving. So yeah... for subjects which don't move, definitely use a tripod. But for bugs and things which move in the wind, a tripod is almost impossible to manage, so you just have to do your best handheld.

[baro-nite]

Bugs in the wild and a closeup/macro setup and tripod do not mix well. I never use a tripod for my macro work. That might work if you bring the bugs inside as I have known other photographers to do, but not me, I like my bugs/insects in their natural habitat.

In general I agree, although for a counter-example check out John Hallmén. He does a lot of focus stacking, quite a bit of it in the wild. He gets up early.

[Paleo Pete]

I almost never use a tripod, it's almost useless for insects, they don't stick around while I set it up, and if I'm after flowers no more than a few inches tall, it's too tall to do the trick.

I do almost all hand held, most of the time I use flash, which helps stop motion a lot, and I try to use something to brace my left hand on and help hold the camera steady. Often with tiny flowers I'll rest my hand on the ground and use a thumb or finger to rest the bottom of the lens on. In other cases I sit so I can rest my left elbow on my leg and use it to brace the camera. Sometimes if I want a low angle I have to lay down on the ground, that makes a tripod impossible...

For insects I usually stick to the 135mm lens and extension tubes, it gives me a little more working distance. (a little over a foot) I can rarely get close enough to an insect for the 50mm, which has a working distance of only a couple of inches. Insects almost never let me that close, forget about lizards...they don't even like to let me get shots with the 135...

For taller flowers, a tripod would probably work well. I've gotten so accustomed to shooting hand held I almost never think about it. I've only done a few still life shots, but it works great for those.

I've also tried a monopod, it seemed to help, but wasn't great.

[BrianR]

It depends on the insect and what it's doing, but I've used a tripod many times for longish exposures on wild insects. For example moths found in the daytime will almost always pose patiently, so will the mantids we have here, and pupae are always willing.

On breezy days with calm periods, I find a tripod very handy for flower closeups. You can sit there with the mirror locked up waiting for a calm spell to snap the shot. For flowers I usually figure out roughly where the camera will be for the shot I want by moving around and looking from different directions with the camera handheld. Once I know where I want the camera, setting up the tripod is relatively quick. I find this easier than trying to move around with the tripod still attached to the camera.

In addition to a 'full sized' tripod, I usually carry a gorillapod or two that work well to support the camera very close to the ground (they also see duty holding flashes).

Outside of a camera support, a tripod is also handy to have around. It can be your first light stand if you move into off camera lights, you can lash a reflector/diffuser/background to it, or you can set it up below a flower and gently clamp the stem to it to hold the flower still on a windy day.