Options for macro photography

dissent

There are some good links in this article (searched on "field stacking") -
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19176

dissent

and this one -

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18754

dissent

. . . and . . . out of moderation.

I'll drink to that!

Msmoto

Back a couple weeks ago...
Correlli March 26...asked about a small camera his wife could do macro photos with and not have to spend a fortune...I think this was the question.....

Do we have any more good suggestions?

proudgeek

Older D3100 and the new 40mm macro is probably the cheapest solution.

Correlli

Thanks for the suggestions. Even the "more expensive" stuff is interesting. Maybe not for this project but in general. We are currently looking into the D3100 with the existing AF-D 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 with its macro option using manual focus.

paulr

I think the subject as turned to Macro full stop. but some great information is being passed on
So for further diversification is this the ultimate
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fewston__swinsty_reservoir_photographs_2008/8624078835/
Available from Gognisys.com but be prepared to rob the Piggy bank

Msmoto

It would appear the StackShot Macro Rail Package with Nikon D adaptor for about $600 is the way to go. Considering the RRS rail only cost over half that, this fully automated system looks good...if one is into the best in focus stacking equipment.

But, maybe Correlli's wife is not in to this...LOL

paulr

I think Correlli's wife lost interest on page one, but maybe Correlli is checking his credit card with all these wonderful suggestions on macro production [-X

paulr

Above is Spam ?

Msmoto

I don't see any spam..... LOL

paulr

Msmoto You have the Magic touch

Msmoto

Quasar asked....
I've found a good site for lens reviews in http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php but I couldn't find any macro lenses on that site. Maybe I overlooked one or maybe they're just not there.

I just ordered a D800 and it will be here next week. So far I've decided to get an 85 1.8G and a Sigma 35mm F 1.4 DG HSM.

I would also like a macro and a long zoom. It would be great if I could find a good long zoom that also did macro well so I could save some money.

Do any of you do macro photography? What do you use?
- See more at: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/1324/what-are-the-best-fx-macro-lenses#sthash.MgogH73y.dpuf

Msmoto

In addition, if you are serious about the best, Michael Erlewine might have some thoughts..

Try looking here

http://www.amazon.com/review/RVB06QEKTGCK2

sevencrossing

Quasar

......I would also like a macro and a long zoom. It would be great if I could find a good long zoom that also did macro well ......

for serious macro, you are better off with prime rather than a zoom

The Nikon 105mm f2.8 G AF-S VR IF ED Micro Nikkor is one of Nikon's top lenses

For a long zoom, you will find the Nikon 80-400mm AF-S Nikkor f4.5-5.6G ED VR hard to beat

or for a few pennies more The Nikon 200-400mm f4 G VR II AF-S ED Lens

.....so I could save some money......

sorry, we are not very at that

heartyfisher

I use a sigma 150 F2.8 for my macro fun! But i have been thinking of getting the 70-200 F4 (with close up lense) to replace that. Sometimes I use my old tamron 200-400 F5.6 with extension tubes for macro.

Fred_B

I think the best budget setup for post card sized subjects is a reasonably good set of extension tubes and a 50mm 1.8. The inexpensive 50 is small enough so that even the built in pop-up flash can shoot over the lens without a shadow.

It's also a great lens to have on an inexpensive camera for snapshots.

For a light budget camera just about any recent DX model that has a built in focus motor would be great. You can find some deals on clean used D90's for instance. An in camera focus will let you use some of the older used lenses without breaking the bank.

Pierre

If you had told me 4 years ago that I would spend 1000,s of $ to take pictures of flowers and butterfly, I would have called you crazy. I must have lost my mind some where :-) Its all NR fault, and I love it.

Yes off topic, I know...

kyoshinikon

I to this day use my 55mm micro. If I want more reach I put extension tubes on it.

Photobug

I sold the 55mm macro when I left film and got the 105mm F 2.8. Terrific lens. In the winter I shoot around 400 macro pictures of flowers. My wife and I like the winter color. It's a great way to sharpen your macro skills and to get a few terrific closeups for contests.

macsavageg4

I have the Nikkor Micro 55mm f/2.8, Micro Nikkor 55mm f/3.5, and Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8. The last lens is a hell of a lens for what it can do just being mounted on the body without any extension tubes. I am now using the 60mm f/2.8 for documenting liquid spills similarly to Symphotic on machines that are checked in at work for repair. I would really like to get my hands on either a Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 or the Micro Nikkor 200mm f/4 or the dream the impossible dream Micro Nikkor 70-180mm f/4.5-5.6.

For extreme macro work I have a set of PB-5s and a some enlarger lenses. I need to mess with them again at some point here.

Ade

Cheap DIY macro rig captures stunning images of snowflakes:



http://chaoticmind75.blogspot.ru/2013/08/my-technique-for-snowflakes-shooting.html

It would be neat to try something like that this winter.

NSXTypeR

Cheap DIY macro rig captures stunning images of snowflakes:

http://chaoticmind75.blogspot.ru/2013/08/my-technique-for-snowflakes-shooting.html

It would be neat to try something like that this winter.

Wow, that's pretty cool! Point and shoots are excellent for macros-

I've gotten excellent results from my Nikon point and shoot- it's just that the AF system is pretty bad and only works on static subjects really. If you half press the shutter and lock focus, you can try moving in and out to get the right plane of focus.



But when the AF doesn't work right, it's maddening.

WestEndBoy

Godless said:
I would love to see an AF-S G version of the Nikon 200mm f/4 macro. But we´ll see if that ever happens.

It will happen pretty soon I think. It is the oldest left in the macro line. I intend to buy the current model before they come out with an upgrade as I doubt it will be any better. Most Macro work is better with Manual Focus, so I don't see a benefit of a better AF system. I don't need VR - I would buy another lens for that with better bokeh as bokeh is usually not on the macro designer's to do list. I know that some of you have recommended the 105 Macro for portraits, but I would buy the 200mm Macro and then the 105 DC 2.0 (I have the 135 and it is incredible) first.

I suppose if you are trying to buy a lens that is good enough for a few things, then a 200 mm Macro with AF-S G or a 105 2.8 Macro doubling as a portrait lens makes sense as the price starts to add up. I would rather wait and save my money to buy the best tool for the specific job.

spraynpray

"Most Macro work is better with Manual Focus, so I don't see a benefit of a better AF system. I don't need VR"

I DO find AF useful for macro. I lock the camera to only release when in-focus and single spot continuous focus because my macro is usually hand-held in the field which is rarely entirely windless. The conditions plus my inability to stand as still as I once did make those setting work for me.

I have the 60 but the 105 is IMHO the best compromise between the 200's too much telephoto shake (and no VR) and the 60's price/performance. The 105 would give the most useful working distance for me. If your macro work is on a tripod, then absolute performance is the major consideration - but still the 105 is the best IMHO.