Looking for a macro lens for bug photography

JeffJS · 09-08-2010, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by mantis

i was reading up on the lighting via that macro link that lidy linked me below and got some ideas for diffusers, its good that i can make one at home, but would you suggest getting a remote flash? or adapt it to use the build in flash?

the only thing im a bit iffy with is how he/she got such great pics of the bugs with black backrounds, is this using the flash/diffuser at night time?

You would have to ask Lidy. I think we all have our different methods. For a regular shoe mount flash situation, if I want a lit foreground and a dark background, I'll go High Speed Sync. Only certain flashes are capable of that and they have to be wired or mounted to the hot shoe (the AF540 and AF360 and some third party flashes do it).

Not a Macro but..

1/500 sec at f5. It's a night time shot but with a normal exposure, I could have lit this up a lot more.

mantis · 09-08-2010, 10:05 PM

cool, ok, will have to ponder what to do about this, at least i know now that everything with a black back ground is just a night shot, i thought it was something fancy...

JeffJS · 09-09-2010, 04:45 AM

Well, Mine, are night shots. I can't and won't speak for everyone else.

KxBlaze · 09-09-2010, 10:28 AM

I vote for the FA 50mm or 100mm Macro. Both are 1:1 ratio. The 50mm can be had for around $300 and the 100mm fro around $400.

**Actually another vote is for the DA 35mm ltd Macro. Also a 1:1 ratio and it will take "better" photos than either FA lens but it is a bit more $.

mantis · 09-09-2010, 03:36 PM

whats so bad about AF lenses? the 90mm tamron one im getting has AF

KxBlaze · 09-09-2010, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by mantis

whats so bad about AF lenses? the 90mm tamron one im getting has AF

Who said auto-focus lenses are bad? I love them. I only own 2 manual focus lenses and they barely get used. All of the lenses (or at least most) mentioned in this thread are AF, and are all good lenses.

mantis · 09-09-2010, 04:27 PM

ok, well i was speaking to a fellow at a camera store and he was suggesting the sigma 17-300? or something has a sharper picture and has a macro OPTION, i dont realy like the sound of this, because i want one just for macro, and i assume if its just an OPTION, it isnt a true macro?

he also suggested a pentax 50mm macro lens...

what do you guys think?

mantis · 09-09-2010, 05:00 PM

also, will the tamron 90mm be able to acheiv this? aka, this close up

JeffJS · 09-09-2010, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by mantis

ok, well i was speaking to a fellow at a camera store and he was suggesting the sigma 17-300? or something has a sharper picture and has a macro OPTION, i dont realy like the sound of this, because i want one just for macro, and i assume if its just an OPTION, it isnt a true macro?

he also suggested a pentax 50mm macro lens...

what do you guys think?

There is nothing wrong with a dedicated Pentax 50mm macro lens. Unless it's the DFA version however, it's probably a 1:2.

That said, re the sigma being sharper than a dedicated macro, I Highly doubt it.

This is 1:1 from my DFA100mm..

It is the center of one of these flowers..

mantis · 09-09-2010, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by JeffJS

There is nothing wrong with a dedicated Pentax 50mm macro lens. Unless it's the DFA version however, it's probably a 1:2.

That said, re the sigma being sharper than a dedicated macro, I Highly doubt it.

This is 1:1 from my DFA100mm..

It is the center of one of these flowers..

you say unless its the dfa version, but you have the dfa version, and those pics look quite good, whats wrong with the dfa version? and if there is something wrong with it how come u use it?

JeffJS · 09-09-2010, 05:40 PM

Originally posted by mantis

you say unless its the dfa version, but you have the dfa version, and those pics look quite good, whats wrong with the dfa version? and if there is something wrong with it how come u use it?

The DFA macros are Pentax's latest and greatest and there is nothing wrong with them. In fact, if you Really want to spend the cash, a very good way to go. What I meant was that Pentax's earlier (A and M) 50mm macros are 1:2, half life sized. The DFAs are 1:1, full sized.

**Digitalis** · 09-09-2010, 06:33 PM

I find using a longer Macro lens is very beneficial with insects, especially easily scared ones.

get something like a 200mm f/4 and some extension tubes. that ought to give you a decent working distance from your subject.

Personally I use the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 and Pentax FA*200mm f/4 ED macro lenses...which are highly regarded and offer the ultimate in image quality.

To get black backgrounds I keep a 8"X10" piece of black velvet in my camera bag. black velvet eats light and is useful for eliminating distracting backgrounds.

Sigma 180mm f/3.5

mantis · 09-09-2010, 06:57 PM

thanks for that jeff, but no im not really keen on spending a lot on a lens, im not a professional, just a hobby

i like that velvet idea

ok ill check those lenses out, wat are their market value these days?

JeffJS · 09-09-2010, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

I find using a longer Macro lens is very beneficial with insects, especially easily scared ones.

get something like a 200mm f/4 and some extension tubes. that ought to give you a decent working distance from your subject.

Personally I use the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 and Pentax FA*200mm f/4 ED macro lenses...which are highly regarded and offer the ultimate in image quality.

To get black backgrounds I keep a 8"X10" piece of black velvet in my camera bag. black velvet eats light and is useful for eliminating distracting backgrounds.

Sigma 180mm f/3.5

With prices to match, IF you can find them.

MoiVous · 09-09-2010, 08:17 PM

Most have said it - but almost all current true macro lenses (not zooms with a pseudo macro function) are pin sharp and easy to handle - so +1 on that.

Originally posted by Digitalis

I find using a longer Macro lens is very beneficial with insects, especially easily scared ones.

get something like a 200mm f/4 and some extension tubes. that ought to give you a decent working distance from your subject.

Personally I use the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 and Pentax FA*200mm f/4 ED macro lenses...which are highly regarded and offer the ultimate in image quality.

To get black backgrounds I keep a 8"X10" piece of black velvet in my camera bag. black velvet eats light and is useful for eliminating distracting backgrounds.

Sigma 180mm f/3.5

Digitalis makes an important point - the longer the focal length, the greater the subject distance. Keep that in mind.

Originally posted by JeffJS

The DFA macros are Pentax's latest and greatest and there is nothing wrong with them. In fact, if you Really want to spend the cash, a very good way to go. What I meant was that Pentax's earlier (A and M) 50mm macros are 1:2, half life sized. The DFAs are 1:1, full sized.

Once you get hooked on macro like Yeatzee and Rense you'll probably start using other kit (like the bellows you've got on order). But be warned - some of the newer lenses do not have an aperture ring (eg PENTAX-D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro WR) - so you can't control that at all

. And if you reverse it, same applies. Hence Jeff is not quite right there.

And as for flash - a macro maniacs best friend. Get one you can sync/slave off camera as you'll want to side light etc.

Then you'll want some other things like macro rails, reversing rings, ring flash (Digitalis has one he uses for things other than macro!).

Enjoy the adventure!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How much magnification can a given lens give in macro photography?	justtakingpics	Photographic Technique	5	05-08-2010 11:37 AM
macro-photography: reverse mounted lens + teleconverter??	ezechiel	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	11	04-13-2010 11:36 PM
Macro lens for food photography	soccerjoe5	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	10-16-2008 02:15 AM
Lady Bug Macro	eccs19	Post Your Photos!	0	10-13-2008 04:45 AM
Bug Macro?	68wSteve	Post Your Photos!	1	08-23-2008 09:48 AM

09-08-2010, 04:26 PM	#16
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by mantis i was reading up on the lighting via that macro link that lidy linked me below and got some ideas for diffusers, its good that i can make one at home, but would you suggest getting a remote flash? or adapt it to use the build in flash? the only thing im a bit iffy with is how he/she got such great pics of the bugs with black backrounds, is this using the flash/diffuser at night time? You would have to ask Lidy. I think we all have our different methods. For a regular shoe mount flash situation, if I want a lit foreground and a dark background, I'll go High Speed Sync. Only certain flashes are capable of that and they have to be wired or mounted to the hot shoe (the AF540 and AF360 and some third party flashes do it). Not a Macro but.. 1/500 sec at f5. It's a night time shot but with a normal exposure, I could have lit this up a lot more.

09-08-2010, 10:05 PM	#17
mantis Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Australia, Victoria Posts: 39 Original Poster	cool, ok, will have to ponder what to do about this, at least i know now that everything with a black back ground is just a night shot, i thought it was something fancy...

09-09-2010, 04:45 AM	#18
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Well, Mine, are night shots. I can't and won't speak for everyone else.

09-09-2010, 10:28 AM	#19
KxBlaze Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,602	I vote for the FA 50mm or 100mm Macro. Both are 1:1 ratio. The 50mm can be had for around $300 and the 100mm fro around $400. **Actually another vote is for the DA 35mm ltd Macro. Also a 1:1 ratio and it will take "better" photos than either FA lens but it is a bit more $.

09-09-2010, 03:36 PM	#20
mantis Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Australia, Victoria Posts: 39 Original Poster	whats so bad about AF lenses? the 90mm tamron one im getting has AF

09-09-2010, 04:23 PM	#21
KxBlaze Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,602	Originally posted by mantis whats so bad about AF lenses? the 90mm tamron one im getting has AF Who said auto-focus lenses are bad? I love them. I only own 2 manual focus lenses and they barely get used. All of the lenses (or at least most) mentioned in this thread are AF, and are all good lenses.

09-09-2010, 04:27 PM	#22
mantis Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Australia, Victoria Posts: 39 Original Poster	ok, well i was speaking to a fellow at a camera store and he was suggesting the sigma 17-300? or something has a sharper picture and has a macro OPTION, i dont realy like the sound of this, because i want one just for macro, and i assume if its just an OPTION, it isnt a true macro? he also suggested a pentax 50mm macro lens... what do you guys think?

09-09-2010, 05:00 PM	#23
mantis Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Australia, Victoria Posts: 39 Original Poster	also, will the tamron 90mm be able to acheiv this? aka, this close up

09-09-2010, 05:30 PM	#24
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by mantis ok, well i was speaking to a fellow at a camera store and he was suggesting the sigma 17-300? or something has a sharper picture and has a macro OPTION, i dont realy like the sound of this, because i want one just for macro, and i assume if its just an OPTION, it isnt a true macro? he also suggested a pentax 50mm macro lens... what do you guys think? There is nothing wrong with a dedicated Pentax 50mm macro lens. Unless it's the DFA version however, it's probably a 1:2. That said, re the sigma being sharper than a dedicated macro, I Highly doubt it. This is 1:1 from my DFA100mm.. It is the center of one of these flowers..

09-09-2010, 05:36 PM	#25
mantis Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Australia, Victoria Posts: 39 Original Poster	Originally posted by JeffJS There is nothing wrong with a dedicated Pentax 50mm macro lens. Unless it's the DFA version however, it's probably a 1:2. That said, re the sigma being sharper than a dedicated macro, I Highly doubt it. This is 1:1 from my DFA100mm.. It is the center of one of these flowers.. you say unless its the dfa version, but you have the dfa version, and those pics look quite good, whats wrong with the dfa version? and if there is something wrong with it how come u use it?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-09-2010, 05:40 PM	#26
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by mantis you say unless its the dfa version, but you have the dfa version, and those pics look quite good, whats wrong with the dfa version? and if there is something wrong with it how come u use it? The DFA macros are Pentax's latest and greatest and there is nothing wrong with them. In fact, if you Really want to spend the cash, a very good way to go. What I meant was that Pentax's earlier (A and M) 50mm macros are 1:2, half life sized. The DFAs are 1:1, full sized.

09-09-2010, 06:33 PM	#27
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	I find using a longer Macro lens is very beneficial with insects, especially easily scared ones. get something like a 200mm f/4 and some extension tubes. that ought to give you a decent working distance from your subject. Personally I use the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 and Pentax FA200mm f/4 ED macro lenses...which are highly regarded and offer the ultimate in image quality. To get black backgrounds I keep a 8"X10" piece of black velvet in my camera bag. black velvet eats light and is useful for eliminating distracting backgrounds. Sigma 180mm f/3.5*

09-09-2010, 06:57 PM	#28
mantis Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Australia, Victoria Posts: 39 Original Poster	thanks for that jeff, but no im not really keen on spending a lot on a lens, im not a professional, just a hobby i like that velvet idea ok ill check those lenses out, wat are their market value these days?

09-09-2010, 07:55 PM	#29
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by Digitalis I find using a longer Macro lens is very beneficial with insects, especially easily scared ones. get something like a 200mm f/4 and some extension tubes. that ought to give you a decent working distance from your subject. Personally I use the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 and Pentax FA200mm f/4 ED macro lenses...which are highly regarded and offer the ultimate in image quality. To get black backgrounds I keep a 8"X10" piece of black velvet in my camera bag. black velvet eats light and is useful for eliminating distracting backgrounds. Sigma 180mm f/3.5* With prices to match, IF you can find them.

09-09-2010, 08:17 PM	#30
MoiVous Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 677	Most have said it - but almost all current true macro lenses (not zooms with a pseudo macro function) are pin sharp and easy to handle - so +1 on that. Originally posted by Digitalis I find using a longer Macro lens is very beneficial with insects, especially easily scared ones. get something like a 200mm f/4 and some extension tubes. that ought to give you a decent working distance from your subject. Personally I use the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 and Pentax FA200mm f/4 ED macro lenses...which are highly regarded and offer the ultimate in image quality. To get black backgrounds I keep a 8"X10" piece of black velvet in my camera bag. black velvet eats light and is useful for eliminating distracting backgrounds. Sigma 180mm f/3.5* Digitalis makes an important point - the longer the focal length, the greater the subject distance. Keep that in mind. Originally posted by JeffJS The DFA macros are Pentax's latest and greatest and there is nothing wrong with them. In fact, if you Really want to spend the cash, a very good way to go. What I meant was that Pentax's earlier (A and M) 50mm macros are 1:2, half life sized. The DFAs are 1:1, full sized. Once you get hooked on macro like Yeatzee and Rense you'll probably start using other kit (like the bellows you've got on order). But be warned - some of the newer lenses do not have an aperture ring (eg PENTAX-D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro WR) - so you can't control that at all . And if you reverse it, same applies. Hence Jeff is not quite right there. And as for flash - a macro maniacs best friend. Get one you can sync/slave off camera as you'll want to side light etc. Then you'll want some other things like macro rails, reversing rings, ring flash (Digitalis has one he uses for things other than macro!). Enjoy the adventure!