Brittany Shaw Lenses and Filters

Here are Todays Amazing Macro Photo Deals!

More Great Information on Macro Photo:

Urban Algae Farms Could Heat Buildings While Treating Wastewater (Inhabitat)

Macro of Ulva Algae photo from Shutterstock Pardon the potty talk, but
wouldn't it be great if every time you flushed the toilet you were actually
generating heat for your home? That's exactly what a Los Angeles-based startup
is hoping to accomplish. OriginOil, a company that specializes in converting
algae into fuel, is working on [...]

Inhabitat

Macro photos without Macro Lens?

I am an absolute rookie in DSLR photography, and I am planning to get myself a Nikon D3100 and a Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro Lens. It is within my budget, but I am wondering whether I should not be too hasty in getting the Macro lens. I really love macro photos and it is one of the main reasons why i would like to pick up DSLR photography. My question is, can i shoot nice macro photos without a specialised macro lens ?

If you are really into wanting to do macro, nothing beats a macro lens. The other options; reversing rings, Extension Tubes, and macro filters are just not as good as a macro lens.

I have two macro lenses; the Nikon 40mm micro and Tokina 100mm macro, both of which are true 1:1 macro lenses. Each has their advantages and disadvantages.

The 100mm lens is good for staying back a bit so you don't scare off bugs and such, but at 100mm the DoF is exceedingly narrow, so it is a compromise in a lot of situations to ensure you have sufficient DoF. For one, you have to almost shoot straight-on, as any angle will exacerbate the limits of the DoF.

At the other end of the spectrum, the 40mm lens has a much wider DoF, due to it's short focal length. However, the short focal length means you have to get way too close in many situations, so it is hard to achieve the 1:1 macro range. This lens is better situated if you don't quite need that close of a photo, and I use it mostly for moderate (less than 1:1) macro shots.

So my two lenses are pretty much at each end of the macro spectrum. Which lens I use depends on what I am photographing.

Also, and especially with the 100mm lens, you are having to stop down a lot. My 100mm lens can go to f/64 at the macro end, and while that does help somewhat with the DoF issue, it can result in an underexposed photo - even in bright daylight.

For that reason if you are serious with macro, you will soon want to buy a Macro Flash. I have a Nikon R1 flash system (you would need the more expensive R1C1 if you were going to use it with a D3100).

Thing is, macro is a rich and rewarding aspect of photography, but it is expensive. If macro is going to be a significant form of photography, I would not buy a D3100. I would buy at minimum a D90, or even a D7000. Here is why.

1. lens choice. First and foremost, most macro shooting is done with manual focus, so in that regard, it matters little whether the lens is AF or AF-S. However, you should know that a D3100 (and D5100) lack focusing motors so that they cannot autofocus AF lenses. These cameras can only autofocus AF-S lenses.

On the other hand, a D90 and D7000 do have the focusing motor, so that they can autofocus AF and AF-S lenses.

While this actually does not matter much for macro use as you will normally manual focus the lens anyway, the fact is that most 100mm macro lenses make excellent portraiture lenses too. While using one on a cropped camera means you will have to backup a bit, most times you can do so.

Also, if you want to use a macro flash such as the Nikon R1 system or even the Metz M15 ring flash, you will want the camera to have CLS remote commander functionality. This is a wireless system that allows you to fully control the macro flash (and other speedlight flashes) from the camera. Both D90 and D7000 have this feature, but the D3100/D5100 do not.

Solutions.

For the macro flash, as I said, the D3100 and D5100 cannot wireless/remote control the macro flash. However, you can buy the $250 SU800 adapter (or buy the Nikon R1C1 rather than the Nikon R1 as the R1C1 includes the SU800). However, if you know macro is going to be a large part of your photography, then you might as well add that $250 to your camera purchase.

For lenses, if you want a 100/105mm range lens, Nikon's AF-S 105mm lens is $900. Tokina's 100mm lens is half that price, and is a very high quality lens. So you could apply that $450 savings by buying the Tokina to the camera as well.

So the combination of buying an AF lens and not needing the SU800 - and apply that savings ($700) to a D7000 or D90, and you will have a better camera for macro use.

Also, you will definitely need a remote control for a macro setup and a tripod. The D3100 can only use a wired remote control, while the D90/D7000 can use a wired or wireless ML-L3. I prefer the wireless solution, so again, for me at least - the D90/D7000 works better for macro use.

And for a tripod, you will want something with an articulated center column that can go from vertical to horizontal so you can get real low. Something like a Benro A2970F or equivalent from other manufacturers.

Totaling it all up:

Camera: $900 to $1,400
Macro Lens: $300 to $1,000
Macro Flash: $400 to $700
Tripod: $200 to $400
Remote release: $20 to $40

This is the ideal solution, but the best for macro. You can go less expensive, but sooner or later, if you are into macro, you will be spending the money for these things.

Tags:   howto · macro · macro photography · macro photography equipment · macro photography tips · macro photography tutorial · macro photos · photo · photography · photosNo Comments