OakR
newbie
Reged: 26/11/2007
Posts: 40
Loc: London, England
|
|
Hello all
I'm looking to get a macro lens to take grasshoppers, spiders, bees and slightly smaller bugs etc.
I've done a fair bit of research on the lenses out there but I am not sure which lengh to go with. Some people say 150mm is best (and certainly more expensive!)so as not to scare them off wich makes sense.
However I was trying to photograph said grasshoppers (with my 24-105mm 'macroish' lens at eye level this weekend and I found that the blades of grass etc got it the way a lot - at close distance I could palm these down but with a longer min focusing distance this would not be possible.
So for those that regularly take small bugs do you find twigs, general vegetation a problem or do you normally manage a clearer shot with a bit of patience (I can do patience)?
Alternatively as I aim to take my first tentavive steps into the world of Macro, has anyone tried extension tubes with the 70-200 f4 (non IS) - this angle I need to research more I've not quite figured out how they work.
This is purely for enjoyment, I have no plans make huge posters out of these, A4 would prob be a max size.
Thanks
Al
|
Gordon_McGeachie
Joke Historian
Reged: 19/01/2007
Posts: 3823
Loc: East Yorkshire,
|
|
I have the Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens and it is an absolute cracker.
I would have preferred the 180mm but that was out of my league at the £680 mark.
--------------------
Old Photographers never die,They just go out of focus.
Jet Noise - The Sound Of Freedom
She Took To The Sky Like A Lovesick Angel.
www.flickr.com/photos/gordon_mcgeachie/
www.flickr.com/people/26089093@N08/
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 6876
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
So for those that regularly take small bugs do you find twigs, general vegetation a problem or do you normally manage a clearer shot with a bit of patience (I can do patience)?
Patience to search and then recognse how you need a scene to be arranged to be able to get the photograph you want....and maybe a little "gardening" of leaves and twigs to remove distractions.
Personally I find the working distance of a 100mm lens on APS-C to be fine for most things(about 160mm in 35mm terms). Butterflies can be a bit of a pain as they are usually easy to scare but most beasties can be approached if you sneak up on them and move slowly. More working distance for wild butterflies and other large flying insects would certainly be handy and longer lenses with a narower angle of view also help to isolate small areas of even toned backgrounds. Shorter lenses are smaller, lighter and easier to handhold.
You'll need patience....enjoy 
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
OakR
newbie
Reged: 26/11/2007
Posts: 40
Loc: London, England
|
|
Quote:
I would have preferred the 180mm but that was out of my league at the £680 mark.
Indeed! Thanks Gordon have checked out the 90mm lens and it's good to hear a positive review from someone who has used it.
Al
|
OakR
newbie
Reged: 26/11/2007
Posts: 40
Loc: London, England
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
So for those that regularly take small bugs do you find twigs, general vegetation a problem or do you normally manage a clearer shot with a bit of patience (I can do patience)?
Patience to search and then recognse how you need a scene to be arranged to be able to get the photograph you want....and maybe a little "gardening" of leaves and twigs to remove distractions.
Personally I find the working distance of a 100mm lens on APS-C to be fine for most things(about 160mm in 35mm terms). Butterflies can be a bit of a pain as they are usually easy to scare but most beasties can be approached if you sneak up on them and move slowly. More working distance for wild butterflies and other large flying insects would certainly be handy and longer lenses with a narower angle of view also help to isolate small areas of even toned backgrounds. Shorter lenses are smaller, lighter and easier to handhold.
You'll need patience....enjoy
Thanks Andrew, I have the patience to sit and wait for wildlife to appear in a spot, I'm not sure if I have developed the ability to recognise / create the scene as you describe but practise makes perfect as they say. I can do the sneak and slow moving, though I'm not sure if that's due to too many takewawys  ...
Thanks for the help, much appreciated.
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4200
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
Thanks Gordon have checked out the 90mm lens and it's good to hear a positive review from someone who has used it.
Another vote for the Tamron 90mm. I have one of these and it's terrific for optical quality, and rather smaller and lighter than most macro lenses around 100mm focal length.
|
Panda_
enthusiast
Reged: 17/06/2008
Posts: 207
Loc: South Wales
|
|
Quote:
Butterflies can be a bit of a pain as they are usually easy to scare but most beasties can be approached if you sneak up on them and move slowly.
Those damn butterflies! I will get a shot one of these days, they seem to have an anti-Fuji sensor implanted in them 
--------------------
My Flickr account.
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 6876
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Butterflies can be a bit of a pain as they are usually easy to scare but most beasties can be approached if you sneak up on them and move slowly.
Those damn butterflies! I will get a shot one of these days, they seem to have an anti-Fuji sensor implanted in them
I think they just have an anti camera sensor implanted in them  But keep trying  (would've needed to be a lot taller to get that shot on a longer lens....was on my tip toes with the 100mm!)
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
MickLL
Two Grand Man
Reged: 01/08/2004
Posts: 2420
Loc: SE England
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
So for those that regularly take small bugs do you find twigs, general vegetation a problem or do you normally manage a clearer shot with a bit of patience (I can do patience)?
Patience to search and then recognse how you need a scene to be arranged to be able to get the photograph you want....and maybe a little "gardening" of leaves and twigs to remove distractions.
Personally I find the working distance of a 100mm lens on APS-C to be fine for most things(about 160mm in 35mm terms). Butterflies can be a bit of a pain as they are usually easy to scare but most beasties can be approached if you sneak up on them and move slowly. More working distance for wild butterflies and other large flying insects would certainly be handy and longer lenses with a narower angle of view also help to isolate small areas of even toned backgrounds. Shorter lenses are smaller, lighter and easier to handhold.
You'll need patience....enjoy
I take almost nothing but bugs and beasties. What Andrew says makes a lot of sense. I have used 50;100 and 200mm macro lenses. I much prefer the 200mm not only because of the extra working distance but because of its great bokeh (appearance of the out of focus background).
Patience is a great virtue but so is fieldcraft. Learn something about your subject, especially where it's most likely to be found, and your success rate will climb.
MickLL
|
Malcolm_Stewart
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 11/07/2005
Posts: 2217
Loc: Milton Keynes, UK
|
|
Quote:
But keep trying (would've needed to be a lot taller to get that shot on a longer lens....was on my tip toes with the 100mm!)
Lovely shot! Recently I've taken shots of two moths found purely by chance in gardens in Milton Keynes and in each case they weren't listed in Collins Nature Guide to Butterflies and Moths. It's not comprehensive, but in earlier years I've normally found my subject.
#1 was a White Plume Moth, and #2 was a Scalloped Oak Moth. (Got them ID'd by the experts on the ukBirdPhotographers website.) At the same time, I've not seen many others except a few common white, but then not being an expert my recognition of these may have been wrong.
--------------------
Malcolm Stewart
|
Gordon_McGeachie
Joke Historian
Reged: 19/01/2007
Posts: 3823
Loc: East Yorkshire,
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I would have preferred the 180mm but that was out of my league at the £680 mark.
Indeed! Thanks Gordon have checked out the 90mm lens and it's good to hear a positive review from someone who has used it.
Al
You will find some dragonfly pictures on page 8 on here http://www.flickr.com/photos/gordon_mcgeachie/ that were taken with the 90mm
--------------------
Old Photographers never die,They just go out of focus.
Jet Noise - The Sound Of Freedom
She Took To The Sky Like A Lovesick Angel.
www.flickr.com/photos/gordon_mcgeachie/
www.flickr.com/people/26089093@N08/
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 6876
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
But keep trying (would've needed to be a lot taller to get that shot on a longer lens....was on my tip toes with the 100mm!)
Lovely shot!
I wish!  Looks better than I remember it when it's only 500 pixels but the whites on the wings are blown, there's not enough DoF to cover the head properly, there's bits of the flower poking out the back of the butterfly, I chanced my luck on the shutter speed and I think the composition is a bit off too....I think it's safe to say it could be better
Quote:
Recently I've taken shots of two moths found purely by chance in gardens in Milton Keynes and in each case they weren't listed in Collins Nature Guide to Butterflies and Moths. It's not comprehensive, but in earlier years I've normally found my subject.
#1 was a White Plume Moth, and #2 was a Scalloped Oak Moth. (Got them ID'd by the experts on the ukBirdPhotographers website.) At the same time, I've not seen many others except a few common white, but then not being an expert my recognition of these may have been wrong.
You're doing better than me if you can normally ID your subjects! Am guessing there are several white ones out there? I've never really looked close enough to know. Best photograph them and find out
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
OakR
newbie
Reged: 26/11/2007
Posts: 40
Loc: London, England
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
So for those that regularly take small bugs do you find twigs, general vegetation a problem or do you normally manage a clearer shot with a bit of patience (I can do patience)?
Patience to search and then recognse how you need a scene to be arranged to be able to get the photograph you want....and maybe a little "gardening" of leaves and twigs to remove distractions.
Personally I find the working distance of a 100mm lens on APS-C to be fine for most things(about 160mm in 35mm terms). Butterflies can be a bit of a pain as they are usually easy to scare but most beasties can be approached if you sneak up on them and move slowly. More working distance for wild butterflies and other large flying insects would certainly be handy and longer lenses with a narower angle of view also help to isolate small areas of even toned backgrounds. Shorter lenses are smaller, lighter and easier to handhold.
You'll need patience....enjoy
I take almost nothing but bugs and beasties. What Andrew says makes a lot of sense. I have used 50;100 and 200mm macro lenses. I much prefer the 200mm not only because of the extra working distance but because of its great bokeh (appearance of the out of focus background).
Patience is a great virtue but so is fieldcraft. Learn something about your subject, especially where it's most likely to be found, and your success rate will climb.
MickLL
Thanks Mick, that makes a lot of sense.
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 6876
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
....I much prefer the 200mm not only because of the extra working distance but because of its great bokeh (appearance of the out of focus background).
Patience is a great virtue but so is fieldcraft. Learn something about your subject, especially where it's most likely to be found, and your success rate will climb.
MickLL
Talking of nice bokeh.....you wouldn't happen to have a suitable shot to hand? (not that I like trying to give you excuses to post your fine work or anything )
On my 100mm I'm often bothered by out of focus highlights that look like octagons rather than nice soft round blobs:
Am still trying to find one on a web flat enough so I can get it all sharp and still have the spider a reasonable size in the frame. Hopefully in the next month or so I should be finding plenty more of those along the riverbank so I can try again 
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
MickLL
Two Grand Man
Reged: 01/08/2004
Posts: 2420
Loc: SE England
|
|
There's one that I've already posted here.
Cheap lenses have few iris blades and so don't make a circular aperture. More expensive lenses have more iris blades and that makes a more nearly circular aperture and improves bokeh and oof highlights.
MickLL
PS Sorry I don't seem able to link to just my picture. If you are interested you'll have to scroll down the thread. Sorry again.
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 6876
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
There's one that I've already posted here.
Cheap lenses have few iris blades and so don't make a circular aperture. More expensive lenses have more iris blades and that makes a more nearly circular aperture and improves bokeh and oof highlights.
MickLL
PS Sorry I don't seem able to link to just my picture. If you are interested you'll have to scroll down the thread. Sorry again.
No worries Mick. Here's your shot from your 200mm (on APS-C?):
(right clicked the image, selected properties then I copied the URL)
Although compared to one from my 100mm the differences here are perhaps quite subtle in terms of bokeh:
I think I might need to try a bit harder to convince myself I want the 180mm Canon macro lens instead of the 100mm (will have to go try them side by side I think).
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
MickLL
Two Grand Man
Reged: 01/08/2004
Posts: 2420
Loc: SE England
|
|
Thanks for that.
This morning I was running out of time. I tried to link to another picture but failed so then pointed to the one I'd already done.
I think that in order to make a proper comparison you would need two pictures, side by side, same aperture, same b/g distance etc. All I know is that when I moved from the (minolta) 100mm to the (minolta) 200mm I saw a huge improvement in bokeh.
My image above began life as a Fuji Velvia slide. It was scanned at 4000dpi (dedicated Nikon film scanner) then downsized for the web.
It makes a great print, beautifully smooth and wonderfully sharp but the version you see here has suffered very badly from the downsizing. The b/g is very heavily pixellated and the tail is very jaggy. I could have done better but, once again, was in a rush when I posted it. In fact someone (maybe you?) sent me a PM pointing out the pixellation and jaggies . Although it was kind of them I didn't have the time to resize and alter the image.
Later today, when SWMBO isn't looking, I'll try to make a new link to a new photo.
MickLL
|
MickLL
Two Grand Man
Reged: 01/08/2004
Posts: 2420
Loc: SE England
|
|
Here's a couple more.
The top (an Empusa - not mantis religiosa!) is direct from my K-M 7D so that's an APS C sensor.
The bottom (Adonis Blue) is another scan from a slide.
MickLL
|
daft_biker
Action Man!
Reged: 11/10/2006
Posts: 6876
Loc: Doon the glen
|
|
Quote:
All I know is that when I moved from the (minolta) 100mm to the (minolta) 200mm I saw a huge improvement in bokeh.
Am sure you are right. From the one quick shot I've had of a 180mm the OOF areas just seemed "dreamier"  Will get round to doing a proper side by side comparison one of these days.
Was very difficult to handhold such a long lens so would probably force me to take a tripod more often....which might not be a bad thing either! (the spider shot above was on a tripod as it was a several second exposure but the mayfly was handheld. The mayfly shot was actually taken not long after I'd seen your mayfly shot...it came down and landed next to me on a blade of grass and I couldn't resist )
Quote:
The top (an Empusa - not mantis religiosa!) is direct from my K-M 7D so that's an APS C sensor.
Can see your shots better on the PC now....thanks for sharing Was that mantis wild in the UK? I've never seen a real one. Nice find! (and well photographed )
I still think that butterfly shot is a touch of class 
--------------------
Andrew (BSRIPN) ... Pics.
|
MickLL
Two Grand Man
Reged: 01/08/2004
Posts: 2420
Loc: SE England
|
|
Thanks Andrew. I didn't realise that you had seen the shots before. I'd better stop being lazy and upload some newer ones.
I almost always use a tripod. It means that I miss a few shots but also means that I get many more with slower shutter speeds provided that the subject is still!
The Empusa isn't in the UK I found it in a hotel car park in southern France. It is 'wild and free' as we NH photographers say .
MickLL
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
