Reader Interactions
Reader Comments
Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.
A great tutorial for anyone interested in getting into Macro photography. I think two things you mention need reinforcing, as it seems most of your experiences mirror mine, with regard to macro work.
Firstly the camera and lens combo. I agree completely with the view that a high res APS-C rather than a medium or high res full frame is the way to go, if you are aiming for 1:1 for many of your shots, which most will be doing. I won’t be boring by re-iterating why this is so, it is all covered in your article. Lens choice is what I wanted to discuss. For a long time I deprived myself of a proper macro lens. I did the three other things most of us try, many of us simply to keep the cost down. I wish I had dived straight into getting a macro lens a long time ago. The upside of this is that by delaying as I have, I ended up with a truly remarkable macro lens. It is heavy, It is bulky, but it captures beautiful, sharp images with ease, if I am doing my part right!
The other methods I tried were dioptre filter lenses which allowed closer approach with a standard lens. They worked, and the best one I found was the expensive Canon one, about $140 for one. This kind of screw in filter, while it does allow you to get closer to your subject, is self defeating, ultimately, as you have to get so close that you frighten off any live subjects. They are also not flat field, with focus and distortion around the edges of your images. In macro, you get such a shallow depth of field, this is not a problem, as you’ll still get this with a true macro lens. What is the problem is, if you were trying to copy a photographic print, the centre would be sharp, the edges not. The edges will also have some CA due to the interaction of the extra glass on your lens. I abandoned dioptre filters after years of trying to make them work.
Extension tubes were the next thing to try, these move the lens further away from the sensor, with no glass of their own. In so doing, the effective aperture drops, forcing a higher ISO for the same shutter speed. They, too, do introduce some lack of sharpness to all but the very centre of the image. It is progressive and does not fall off as badly as with some dioptre filters, but it is there all the same. It is also a pain choosing which tube to use for a given magnification with a given lens. You can find yourself changing and combining tubes much more than you are shooting images. In the end, I gave up.
One last one I have not tried, is to reverse a standard lens onto the camera body. This involves a lens ‘mount’ with a screw thread which fits the filter thread of your lens (typically 52 or 55mm). It fits onto the lens, and then you mount the lens, with the front of it facing the sensor, the rear element facing the subject. I have seen some very good images in magazines etc taken using this method, but it looks very very fiddly, and I have no idea of what your subject to sensor distance will be. The main issue seems to be controlling the aperture somehow, as this is normally done electronically via the rear of the lens, which is now, of course, not attached to the body, so there is no communication between lens and camera.
The magic of macro, for me, truly began when I got, on ebay, a used copy of a Tamron 90mm SP Di Nikon fit lens. I got it one spring and shot with it all through the summer and autumn. The difference! wow! Now I could just slip the lens on, like any other, and get shooting instantly. The 90mm focal length was great, as it pushed me back further from the subject to get my shot, not having to tap the ant on the head with the front element, but being at least 200mm or 8″ away made such a huge difference, I loved it. When winter came, I had time to look more closely at images gathered, and wondered how to improve them. I read a two-year-old macro comparitive group lens test in one of my subscribed magazines which included my Tamron, the Nikon 105mm, and a new one, the Sigma 105mm EX DG OS HSM. I managed to get a ‘new’ used one and sold my Tamron. The test was right. 105mm is the perfect length for all kinds of macro work, giving you a touch more distance, and the OS in this lens forgives slight camera movement, up or down, side to side, but of course, not into or out of the image, as you will throw the focus out.
If you are like I was, wondering what to try next, don’t waste time, it is too precious. Get a proper macro lens, you will, once you master it, adore the images you’ll get.
That said, brings me to the second point in your article – the monopod. I would VERY strongly endorse the idea of using a monopod instead of handholding. Get one with easy quick release leg levers so you can adjust the height quickly in the field. Once in the shooting zone, you only need to sway gently into or out of the subject to find focus (always shoot in manual focus for macro) and it makes life a heck of a lot easier. If you have very steady hands, you might get away with hand-held shooting but for me, the monopod is as important as the macro lens is.
Thank you for doing such a great in-depth article on Macro, it is truly a wonderful pursuit, within photography, and I hope many more photographers who read this will be inspired to shell out on the right gear, and dicover just how much fun it can be, and how satisfying when you get that ‘shot in a million’.
AutofocusRoss,
Thank you for your feedback! Every method of making a macro lens from a regular lens has its trade-offs. For reversing a lens, one of those trade-offs is that you can’t change the aperture easily, unless you use a lens with a manual aperture. Not to mention the darkened viewfinder (applies to reversing a lens and using extension tubes), which makes focusing even harder. For someone with a low budget, it is great that these options exist. However, it will always be a compromise compared to a good macro lens.
Plus, true macro lenses are getting extremely inexpensive. Lenses like the 90mm Tamron you mentioned are selling for just a few hundred dollars, which is fantastic for anyone who wants to try macro photography for the first time.
You covered everything I was going to mention. I use diopters, tubes, reversal rings, clip on magnifiers, etc. – depending on what mood I am in. I primarily use the Nikon 200mm F4 and the 55mm Micro (manual lens). I would not use anything but the smallest extension tube.
Spenser was right about the bugs. You usually have less than a second to grab a photo when you see it, so you have to be prepared.
BTW – I am apparently another Ross.
Great article I’ve always found macro photography interesting if a little overwhelming this article provides a great beginners guide. I was curious you mentioned the importance of a monopod or tripod is there a type of tripod head or brand that you feel works well? Thanks
James,
Thank you for your feedback, and I am glad you liked the article! A monopod is useful for outdoor, in-the-field macro photography, since it makes it far easier to focus (mainly for 1:1 macros, but for other magnifications as well). A tripod, on the other hand, is most useful for studio macro photography.
The tripod itself is not hugely important, but the head is. For macro photography, even the most high-end ballheads are not ideal — they are hard to position properly. I strongly recommend a geared head, and a good one for the price is the Manfrotto 410 geared head.
It is still expensive at $270, but it is one of the few heads that works well for macro photography. I owned one for several months and liked it quite a bit. I ultimately sold it, though, since I was using my tripod mainly for landscapes (shooting macros handheld) and it was too heavy for me.
For monopods, all that you need is a simple tilt head, such as the Manfrotto 234RC.
I linked to two Manfrotto products because they are all I have tried. There are other, comparable heads from different companies, though (especially for monopods). My advice is just to look around.
I have the same question as James. I looked at the Manfrotto 234RC but, having the manfrotto style mount, it is impractical for me. I have a Swiss-Arca style L-Bracket permanently connected to my camera and don’t wish to switch out for a monopod head. I’ve looked at several but haven’t yet found a good quality, light, tilt-head.
Anybody?
Look at Sirui tilt head.
Thanks! I have a Sirui travel tripod and head, which I’m happy with, so I’ll give it a try. :-)
If you have a huge budget, there is a tilt head from RRS that fits Arca-Swiss brackets, and it is probably the “best” you could get. But, as with all RRS products, it is insanely expensive.
I’m definitely insane. My budget…not so much. ;-)
Thanks, Spencer, for sharing useful knowledge and some outstanding pictures. May I ask you what the pic “Orange drops” actually represents? It’s very intriguing…
Jean,
“Orange Drops” was a fairly weird setup. I put a thin slice from an orange onto a black cloth background, and I hung it about a foot from the camera. I then filled a vase with water, and I began dropping small rocks into the vase. I had my flash off-camera (pointed at the orange, not at the water), and my camera on a tripod. Every time that there was a splash, I would take the picture. Out of the 50+ frames that I took, this one had the best splash. If you look closely enough in each droplet, you can see the tape that I used to hang the orange (on the bottom, since the water makes a mirrored image).
Hope this helps!
Very clever, Spencer, and thanks for the explanation.
Great article and I really enjoyed the pictures. One question, how often are you handholding and how often are you using flash? Ring flash or on camera? My best successes with macro were with my old D300 and the Sigma 105 macro. I haven’t had much time but as spring approaches I’m planning on seeing what I can do now with my Fuji X-T1 and Zeiss macro. Thanks for the inspiration!
NWCS,
The vast majority of the time, I handhold my macro shots. I don’t think that any of the shots from this article were taken on a tripod, aside from the water droplet image in a studio.
Roughly 1/3 of the macro photos I take are shot with a flash. The flash is the Nikon SB-600, and I attach it either directly to the hot shoe, or (less often) I attach the flash to a bracket. The bracket positions the flash several inches above the camera, pointed downwards, and I fire the camera using the camera’s commander mode. The bracket is huge, though, so I tend not to use it. And it is quite true that properly diffusing your flash is absolutely key in macro photography.
I have started to take more “semi macro” photos recently, using about a 1:4 magnification. For these photos, I tend not to use a flash and prefer a wide aperture with natural light.
What a great tutorial. Thanks very much.
Thank you for your comment, Keith! I am glad to hear that you like the article. Good luck with your macro photography!
Great article. We discovered macro photography when we were posted in Singapore! The concrete jungle – (that’s what we expected and were relieved it is not one!) – yielded incredibly beautiful minuscule creatures. And we were fortunate to meet a macro photographer who gave us a few lessons. It’s been a while since I touched that lens since we are now in the “dark continent” with creatures of a rather bigger scale! But you have inspired me to pick up my 105 mm again! Thank you!
Swati, I am glad that the article inspired you to do some macro photography! It really is a fun genre, and it’s something that you can do absolutely anywhere.
Brilliant tutorial. if it wouldn’t be that late I would grab my gear immediately. thanks for the effort.
Phil, thank you for the kind comment! Funny enough, my own tutorial has inspired me, and I spent all of today taking more macro photos : )
It never gets old!
Nice article, and great shots.
Some things I’ll add here is that you don’t need a rail to do image stacks. The software compensates for the shift in image size. I regularly shots product shots for a client who’s products need macros and he wants then in complete focus, and I simply use either my 55mm f/3.5 Ai Nikkor or 105mm f/4 Ai Nikkor and gently shift focus. It’s imperative to maintain overlapping focused areas for image stacks. Photoshop is generally not really a good stacking tool. I personally use Zerene Stacker, but I’m sure other dedicated apps work as well, and certainly better than Photoshop.
Outdoors I’ve had good luck using a 12mm Kenko extension tube on a 300mm f/4.5 Ai Nikkor. It doesn’t introduce much image quality loss and allows me great distance between myself and my subjects. If it’s nice and sunny out this allows for natural sunlight to strike your subject without you blocking light, allowing you a decent aperture and shutter speed. Raising ISO and using judicious use of noise reduction and deconvolving sharpening (on RAW, of course) will allow you greater shutter speeds to play with.
Hope folks find this info helpful.
Spy Black, thanks for the useful info! Most of my experience with focus stacking comes from Photoshop, which really is an inflexible tool for such a process. However, I have also used Helicon focus with good results.
And I agree – extension tubes are probably the best way to increase magnification without losing too much quality. I’m glad that you found such a good solution for your 300mm.
Thank you from me, as well. I got the 105mm f/2.8 last year and a Manfrotto 454 for small adjustments. I recently got the R1C1 kit and will be playing with that this year. I had often wondered about focus stacking because changing the focus distance also changes the magnification. I kept wondering how to compensate and couldn’t find any articles that really addressed it in a way I understood. Nice to know there are some options out there to help me get started when I’m ready to give it a try.
There are several stacking programs. I personally use Zerene Stacker. If you’re curious, you can download a 30-day trail of it to see if it suits your needs.
Just remember to maintain overlapping areas of focus in your images, regardless of what program you use. Although there is (expensive) automated stacking hardware available, a gentle and subtle hand and a lens set to optimum aperture (2-3 stops down) can do the trick.
If your magnification is high, allow for the camera to settle down between shots (unless you’re shooting high-speed strobes).
A problem with speedlights is that they don’t as yet include an LED modeling light (you would think, right?), which makes if difficult to set up your shot for lighting and focus, so I tape LED flashlights to the speedlights with gaffer tape (which is awesome when shooting with umbrellas and softboxes with speedlights). In macro work you could have some parallax with that setup, but it’s still better than nothing. ;-)
I also use and infrared remote trigger to help move the process along (and minimize shake and movement), which you can get for as little as $5 at Amazon.
Hope this helps. Enjoy your macro adventures. Spencer’s great info here will help you get off in the right direction.
While a Nikon guy my self, I would have thought Canon was a good choice for macro, seeing as they offer a 5x magnification lens:
www.bhphotovideo.com/c/pro…_65mm.html
Hi Mark, absolutely, Canon is a fantastic choice for macro. The MP-E 65mm is arguably the best macro-specific lens available for any brand. My mention of Canon’s macro photography difficulties has more to do with calculating aperture rather than the quality of their (excellent) cameras and lenses.
Thanks for your reply :-)
Hi Spencer, excellent article and images!
I read twice your section about Canon vs Nikon and also checked the discussion here about the same thing. Still do not feel comfortable about this difference about aperture calculations. I’d like to dig more into this and would appreciate your answers or links/refferences to where I can find answers. My questions are:
1) What is the phenomenon of aperture acting smaller at 1:1 and higher magnifications? Does this have a name? Any literature or research materials available on this?
2) How do we know what Nikon and Canon do. Are there any lab.tests done? Is there any official info from either manufacturer?
Sorry for being that geek. Looking forward to your answer!
Levan
Levan,
I’ll try to answer your questions as best I can:
1) The f-number for a lens is based on the focal length divided by the physical size of the aperture. For a 50mm lens at f/2, the physical size of the aperture is 25mm. My understanding is that high magnification lenses function as if they have a longer focal length as you focus closer. As such, there is no real name for this phenomenon, since it is just the normal way that apertures are calculated. Nikon compensates for this by displaying the aperture value with the “new” focal length taken into account, while Canon does not.
2) We know because you can set a Canon camera next to a Nikon camera, both at 1:1 magnification, and get the same resulting photo only when the Canon aperture is two stops wider than the Nikon. I can’t find any official information about this, but it can be proven if you have one camera and macro lens from each manufacturer. It is worth noting that you have to calculate apertures “the Canon way” for a Nikon camera if you are using a lens that has no electrical contacts.
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.
Hi Spencer, Great article and pictures, thanks. One question I have is does the focal length of a lens affect the depth of field in macro photography at the same magnification I.e. If a photo was taken of an object to give the same image size of say 1:1 with a 50mm lens, a 105mm lens and a 300mm lens would the depth of field be the same for all three images?
Thanks
George
Good question! You’ll get exactly the same depth of field with all those lenses at 1:1 magnification, assuming that you use the same aperture. This is because the thinner depth of field that comes from a telephoto lens is perfectly canceled by the increased depth of field that happens when you move away from your subject.
Hi Spencer, thank you for that. I had thought earlier that perhaps a wider angle lens might have given a greater depth of field, but the more I thought about it the more I wondered if DOF would be the same at the same aperture. I had a play with a 100-300 zoom tonight and it certainly gave me that impression. In regards to shutter speed usually a longer focal length lens requires a higher shutter speed to get a sharp handheld shot, but I presume the great magnification cancels out any differences there as well. Thanks again, George
Thanks a very informative article seeing that I am a novice.
I have a Nikon D750 with a Nikkor 105mm lense, I am also using a MF18 Macro flash to beat the shade spots.
I am a HELLEBORE grower and is busy compiling a catalog of my flowers. I am however finding it difficult to get that crisp images of my flowers.
Any hints when taking photos of flowers?
I am happy that you liked it, thank you! Yes, if you’re taking pictures of flowers, the good news is that you don’t have to worry as much about your subject moving, and you can stand farther back. That helps with some of the problems of depth of field and focusing that some macro photographers may have.
My only question is whether or not you like the light coming from your MF18 flash. Done well, you can capture beautiful light from flashes that looks just like natural light. However, that can take a lot of trial and error, including time spent creating a good diffuser. Sometimes, the better option is to wait until it is a cloudy day (or a sunny day with patches of clouds) so that everything is in the shade. Then, use a wide to medium aperture (in the range of f/2.8 to f/8) to capture a shallow depth of field. That will often result in beautiful lighting conditions and a very nice, soft effect, if that is your goal.
I hope this helps!
One of the reasons why people choose a macro lens like Nikon’s 105mm is so that they can position the camera some distance from the subject. You can imagine it’s a bit scary for an insect to suddenly find a thing like that bearing down on him/her.
But with flowers, you have no such concerns. And you would be well aware that the shorter the focal length, the greater the depth of field.
Francois, I upset the purists a while back by using a 24mm w/angle to overcome precisely the problem you are faced with. One wrote some rather vitriolic comments about how I must have destroyed the image, by changing the perspectives in relation to the flower. Of course he’d never seen the shot I took, so in the end I refused to continue chatting with him.
The reason I chose to do that was simple. I’d just concluded making over a hundred shots of jewellery for a catalogue, using stackshots – so the clarity and sharpness was outstanding. But when I tried to take a stackshot of an orchid, the software that knits stackshots together somehow couldn’t deal with the softer edges of the petals, and the result was ghastly. So I simply tried the w/angle instead, just to see what happened and what I could achieve. And I must say, I was happy with the result.
I’m not suggesting you should go that far – but there are plenty of good macro lenses out there, and there should be one that is only about 50mm (full frame) or 35m (half frame(.
Thank you, Pete! Your suggestions are spot on. As nice as lenses like the 60mm macro can be, they are not ideal if you are photographing at 1:1 magnification, since you may block the light or scare away your subject.
There is a growing body of work online of ultra-wide macro shots that have fascinating perspectives and looks to them. Whether or not you go that far is up to you, but your technique certainly makes sense to me. I’ve taken a couple “macro” shots with a 24mm that I liked quite a lot, and they give you a look that you won’t capture any other way.
i was mucking about with macro lens this weekend. and i was thinking…these guys should do a macro article. and bang….here it is
I am glad that the timing was right, Velo! Wishing you good luck with your macro lens and work.
Be warned, Velo – macro is addictive!
Thanks Jean Pierre, your response is well appreciated.
I will possibly rent a 50 mm lens and take it from there.
Be warned, Velo – macro is addictive!
Great article Spencer. I purchased a second hand Sigma 70mm 1:2.8 DG MACRO a few years ago for general use due to its extremely sharp image ability, and have been very happy with the results. My next step is to use this lens together with my monopod for macro photography, so this article caught my eye.
One phrase did, however, catch my attention: “…most spiders. Not to mention, they are almost completely harmless (they rarely bite, and it’s not even as bad as a mosquito bite if they do).” Being an Aussie, I can assure you that this assumption does not apply in Australia! But I guess any Aussies reading this would be aware of the local dangers.
Thank you, Peter! The spider comment refers to the particular type of jumping spider that is common in the US, but you are quite right, local differences apply! Based on some of the bugs I have seen there, macro photography in Australia would be… more intense… than it is on this side of the globe.
Dear Spencer I really enjoyed your article. As always you gave some very good tips and insights. I recently purchased a second hand Fuji XT20 to use as a second camera and for travel when I wanted light kit. For fun I tried my Nikon 60mm AF micro with this using an adapter (no electrical contact) as you say in your article using the EVF to assist manual focus with zoom and focus peaking is a great advantage of mirrorless cameras. I managed to capture some nice shots of the bumble bees in my garden, including the odd one in flight. Thanks again for a good macro tutorial.
I am glad you enjoyed the article, thank you! Capturing bumble bees in flight is not an easy thing to do, so congrats on your photos.
Spencer, thank you for the informative article on macro photography. I agree that manual focusing is the way to go. I found Live View with magnification help to make sure focus is spot on. Active insects are challenging, so I like go out early in the morning when they are less active and cover with dew. Like you I like to handheld or use a monopod to stabilize the shot. Once again, thank you for the tutorial.
You are quite welcome. Yes, autofocusing on subjects like this is a very difficult task, even for the best systems. And taking pictures in early morning is one of the secrets to good macro photography!
Hello I have a Fuji Finepix S5200 up until now I’ve only used the Auto and Macro settings on my camera. I now want to explore the other settings on my camera so I have been YouTubing instructions and googling sites to learn more about shooting in A, S, P, and M settings on my camera. My specialty is Macro photography and I want to learn how to get better photos doing it manually. I like to photograph flowers mostly. Your introduction to Macro photography was very interesting and helpful. My camera is a point and shoot and I want to know the best settings to use for getting the sharpest macro photos. Setting the right ISO, F-Stop, shutter speed, lighting etc. Can you walk me through the steps to do this for my type of camera? I’ve been experimenting with my flowering houseplants having some success but not there yet. Any help would be appreciated. I’m not sure I understand all the ‘in’s and out’s yet of what each setting does and what would be the best combination to use.
Marilyn, May I suggest books from John Shaw’s book on close-up photography.
www.amazon.com/John-…olife0c-20
It is an old book from 1987, but the relationships between aperture, shutter speed, and ISO remain the same. John’s books are informative and easily understandable. In fact, his books helped me to instill the disciple and techniques to obtain properly exposed (film or digital formats) and sharp pictures. The hardest to develop is artistic aspect of your vision via composition and etc. That is one of the reason I visit PL and Spencer is great example of someone who make great images. Best of luck.
For macro photos, many of the newer micro 4/3 cameras have focus-stacking built in to the cameras. NO software needed! It works well on the Olympus EM5 MKII and EM1 MKII. Also focus-stacking is built in to the Panasonic G9, the GX9, the GX850 and theGX85.
Good stuff Spencer. I shoot the NIKKOR 105mm on a D5200. May I post a couple of tricks I use in doing Macro work. I use a 32GB card so storage is never a problem for a single days’ outing for micro work. With hand held close-up macro focusing being such a problem, I’ve started setting my ‘Shutter release’ mode to ‘Continuous L’ and fire away for two-five shots of the same subject during the event. With 32GB of storage I can spend the day in macro work; take a dozen pictures of each little critter and delete eleven of them in post processing to get the good one. Works pretty well. Second ‘unorthodox’ trick I use now and then is mount my camera ‘backwards’ on my monopod. This puts the tilt handle in front of the camera and over to the left side to be controlled with my left hand while I look through the camera finding my subject and shooting. Takes a little getting used to the seeming backwards twist of the left hand in order to release or tighten the tilt in order to get everything just right (also when walking and standing I extend the monopod to full length and make the height variations with the upper (of four) joints in the leg. Between the tilt and height of monopod and the continuous shutter release I often come home with sixty or seventy pictures and select eight or ten acceptables; six or eight pretty-goods; and two or three keepers. Beats failing to get a good shot all day.
I’m a portrait photographer. I shot pro portraits for 40 years. Now that I’m retired, I wanted to begin specializing in another genre of photography. I always had my eye on macro photography. Your suburb introductory tutorial on shooting macro images was the final push I needed to immerse myself in this fascinating form of imaging. Thanks for a clear and concise—and beautifully produced and written—piece on the subject.
Thank you so much for this fab tutorial! I consider myself somewhere between a professional and an advanced amateur, and have been a Nikon user for decades. But, alas, due to bulk and weight, I shifted to Olympus OM-D E-M1 a few years ago. For my travels, it is okay, but I miss my Nikons.
Now I am looking to invest for macro photography and would love to know your thoughts on the new Nikon full frame mirrorless due to come out on August 23rd. Rumour has it that there may eventually be 2 models, one with a 45mp and another around 24 mp; new lenses with new mounts, etc. I am a sucker for Nikkor lenses.
Thanks!
How do people get the various insects to hold still? I’m assuming the insects are still alive…
They are indeed alive, at least when I do it (and what I strongly encourage other photographers to do as well). And they move, sometimes a lot! That’s much of the difficulty. From a sharpness perspective, I’m using flash most of the time, or a fast shutter speed and high ISO for less magnified macros. From a focusing perspective, it’s just practice and luck.
This is the first post I have read completely without missing a detail. Thank you! Even with so many youtube tutorials, I couldn’t get such a detailed explanation. My photography interest started by looking at Macro Photography photos. But macro lens are too expensive. But your website inspired me :) thanks! Now I am going to take Nikon 40MM and revisit your site.
I am interested in some tips how various Nikon compatible equipment can be used to get various degree of macro such 2:1, 3:1, 5:1. And comparison photos of the same subject with various setups and degree of magnification.
I have a micro Nikkor 105mm and this is great for 1:1. But I would like to explore higher magnification and the internet searching I have done so far is a bit convoluted with quite varying opinions.
I know that canon has a 5:1 lense option, but what is the best option to achieve similar magnification on a Nikon camera.?