Jump to content

  • Chat
  •  
  •  

Welcome to Formiculture.com!

This is a website for anyone interested in Myrmecology and all aspects of finding, keeping, and studying ants. The site and forum are free to use. Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation points to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Photo

Camera Selection for Optimal Macro Shots


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Offline VoidElecent - Posted July 27 2017 - 9:19 AM

VoidElecent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,339 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA.

Hello all,

 

I think it's about time I start taking some of my own, high quality, photos. I've been marveling at photos on Alex Wild's website and the Ant Photography thread for far too long, and I am done with borrowing photos from forum members— I AM going to purchase a camera of my own.

 

I'm looking for a camera that will get me high definition pictures. I am giving a talk in October regarding anting & myrmecology, and the screen will be pretty large. I need my photos to be high definition (ideally 20+ mp) so they don't look blurry on the screen.

 

Here are my two top options as of now:

 

NIKON D3400

NIKON D5200

CANON EOS Rebel SL1-EFS

 

Yes, these are both DSLR's. I don't know if that's bad, good, or whatever. That's why I made this thread. If anyone has advice on what camera they'd recommend or advice on taking high-def macro shots in general, please reply. Don't NOT reply.

 

Also, I do have a little bit of a price limit; I'd like the camera and lens to be $600 or less if possible.

 

Thank ya!


Edited by VoidElecent, July 27 2017 - 9:52 AM.


#2 Offline Nathant2131 - Posted July 27 2017 - 11:23 AM

Nathant2131

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,509 posts
  • LocationDracut, Massachusetts
How much knowledge do you have on cameras? It would be a smart idea to take a small or one on one class. That's what I did. You can ask your instructor what camera would he the best for your needs.

Edited by Nathant2131, July 27 2017 - 11:24 AM.

  • FeedTheAnts likes this

#3 Offline Batspiderfish - Posted July 27 2017 - 12:51 PM

Batspiderfish

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,614 posts

You don't necessarily need an SLR for macro, although these will have better control and more features. You'll need magnification by use of a dedicated macro lens (pricey), lens coupling (which will work with built-in lenses), lens reversing, or extension tubes/bellows. You'll need bright and diffused light from one or more external flashes (as well as the means to connect them to your camera) or an LED array (more useful for video). After that, lots of practice taking pictures and editing.

 

Keep in mind that the expense of SLR's goes beyond the camera body. You'll need enough for lenses and accessories if you are starting from scratch.

The camera body will not have too much impact on macro quality, although bigger sensors tend to do better in less optimal lighting. Getting a camera with good dynamic range (the ability to derive more pixel data from brights and darks) won't hurt. Compatibility with vintage lenses with use of glassless adapters can also go a long way for saving lens costs (if the flange distance of the camera body's mounting system is less than the flange distance of the vintage lens mount, then they are compatible).


Edited by Batspiderfish, July 27 2017 - 12:52 PM.

  • VoidElecent and Cameron C. Thomas like this

If you've enjoyed using my expertise and identifications, please do not create undue ecological risk by releasing your ants. The environment which we keep our pet insects is alien and oftentimes unsanitary, so ensure that wild populations stay safe by giving your ants the best care you can manage for the rest of their lives, as we must do with any other pet.

 

Exotic ants are for those who think that vibrant diversity is something you need to pay money to see. It is illegal to transport live ants across state lines.

 

----

Black lives still matter.


#4 Offline Cameron C. Thomas - Posted July 27 2017 - 1:03 PM

Cameron C. Thomas

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts
  • LocationVancouver, Washington

How much knowledge do you have on cameras? It would be a smart idea to take a small or one on one class. That's what I did. You can ask your instructor what camera would he the best for your needs.

 

Nathant brings up a great point, and fortunately, you're in a large city. Look around. You're certain to find a photographer or photography company that'll take you shooting for a day and show you the ropes, give recommendations, etc. for a reasonable price. Figure out what you like and would be useful for you prior to committing to equipment and running the risk of buyers remorse. Who knows, there may even be individuals who specialize in insect photography there.


  • Nathant2131 likes this

#5 Offline VoidElecent - Posted July 27 2017 - 3:20 PM

VoidElecent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,339 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA.

Thank you all so much for your responses; I really, really appreciate them.

 

I have taken a photography class before, and it has made a difference. I currently have a 10 megapixel point and shoot (the DSLR will be an upgrade for sure), and I like to think that I take some relatively okay photos with it. Here's a shot of a Solenopsis molesta queen with a Kneallhazia solenopsae fungal infection. 

 

yl73wUm.jpg

 

I just long to discover what I could do with a little more fire power. 

 

Of course, I understand that most of a digital SLR's functionality lies in the quality of its lens and accessories, and I'm willing to invest the time, money and energy to learn more about those options. A camera is an investment that will serve not only me, but my family and my loved ones as well. If I purchase it soon, which I am planning on doing, I will definitely go out of my way to learn more about what successful photography requires. I know a guy in New Jersey who'd probably be willing to show me the ropes.

 

Thank you all, once again, for the help. Based on the bodies I've listed (excluding the Canon, I've eliminated it), which one would give me the most functionality? Obviously, I'll be spending more time worrying about the lens, but buying the right body is the first step.


Edited by VoidElecent, July 27 2017 - 3:22 PM.

  • Martialis likes this

#6 Offline Martialis - Posted July 27 2017 - 4:26 PM

Martialis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,516 posts
  • LocationMississippi

I use a Nikon Powershot, although I am pretty bad at taking photos.


Spoiler

#7 Offline VoidElecent - Posted July 27 2017 - 5:23 PM

VoidElecent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,339 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA.

Alright, I did it. I bought the Nikon D5300 SLR.

 

I figured it would be more worth my while to do research on the kind of macro lens to buy, rather than camera body. Would you recommend buying a macro lens from the same manufacturer (i.e. Nikon) to optimize compatibility, or a third-party lens? 

 

This is the one I'm think of getting (it's the cheapest Nikon one): http://www.nikonusa....m-f%2f2.8g.html

 

But these look cool: https://www.zeiss.co...ilvus-2818.html



#8 Offline chatogaster - Posted July 28 2017 - 1:01 PM

chatogaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • LocationCopenhagen
The most important element for macro is the lens. Dedicated macro lenses have better sharpness than regular lenses, but most importantly: at least a 1:1 magnification ratio.
 
The magnification ratio means that if you place your 10mm ant at the minimum distance the lens can focus at, the projected image of the ant on the sensor will also have a physical size of 10mm. If the lens and the camera are, for example, in the micro four thirds system, that means a sensor size of 18x13.5mm. Since the image of the ant on the sensor will be 10mm big, it'll take up more than half of the width of the 18mm sensor. If you know the pixel resolution of your camera, you can count how many pixels that is, but I would say the pixel count is much less important than a bunch of other factors, which determine sensor quality.
 
Your ant will be magnified 1:1 only if it's at the "working distance" from the lens (equivalent to being at the "minimum focus distance" from the sensor). If it's closer, you won't be able to focus on it. If it's further away, it'll be smaller than 1:1, but sometimes that's what you want, of course. Macro photographers don't discuss the working distance of a lens that much, since with inanimate objects or sometimes even insects you can often get so close, that the glass is touching the subject. The main issue for them is then getting in there with enough lighting and not spooking the subject. For us the issue is the formicarium walls getting in the way. The Olympus 60mm macro lens has a working distance of about 108mm, while the Panasonic 30mm macro lens - about 40mm. The latter will already pose trouble when photographing ants in their nest and lighting them properly, while taking photos in the outworld will always mean a lower magnification, since you can't get close enough. For this reason longer focal lengths are preferred for convenience.
 
Another thing to consider is the depth of field. At these focusing distances and apertures, the dof size might be under a millimeter. That means you will not be able to have much of the ant in focus, even if you managed to focus on it. With just a sliver of sharpness cutting it across, it will still look out of focus. To increase the DoF size you can either move away a bit, or increase aperture. We don't like moving away too far, since it decreases magnification. Increasing aperture works well, but you have to light your subject better to compensate for many times less light coming in through the lens. Check out the DoF calculator to get a feeling of how these settings affect the DoF. You can't just decrease shutter speed to capture more light over time, since your ant is moving, and it will motion blur to oblivion. This is where being able to light the subject comes in handy. Additionally, this is where we can start talking about better/bigger sensors.
 
Bigger sensors can typically capture more light easily. One reason is that they simply have a larger area to capture the light, but they also have more space for each pixel, so there's extra room for lots of funky technology to avoid noise and artifacts when pixels are packed too tightly. So a better quality and bigger sensor will be able to catch more light from the same scene with an equivalent lens and the result will be a less noisy image with fewer artifacts. So Micro Four Thirds is a standard, which in its spec defines the sensor size, among other things. Sony's APS-C would be another one, with a considerably bigger sensor, but also pricier bodies. "full frame" cameras have even larger sensors, and are super-expensive. Before choosing your standard, make sure there are lenses made for it, that fit your needs. It's usually completely fine to mix and match body and lens manufacturers (that's what the standards are for), but making a lens fit a body from a different standard ranges from "you need a connector" to "impossible".
 
One more note on DoF: not only the size of the area in-focus matters, but also how quickly the image explodes to blur outside of it. With very short focal length lenses, the background gets blurry slowly enough, that you might be able to show your ant in its habitat. If you can touch it with the lens, that is, because that's the working distance of short focal length lenses ;) With long focal length, as soon as you get out of the focus area, everything blurs to oblivion, so you're getting your ant on a background of abstract gradients.
 
Disclaimer: I don't actually have any good macro shots in my portfolio to prove I know what I'm talking about ;) I am however in the market for a new camera and lens, and I do work with light and lenses in my day job, so there's that ;) I hope I at least signaled the things you need to take into account.

  • VoidElecent likes this

Camponotus herculeanus

Lasius niger

Mystery ant


#9 Offline VoidElecent - Posted July 29 2017 - 7:04 AM

VoidElecent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,339 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA.

Wow, thanks for the response. This is very helpful; I'll take all of this into consideration I had purchase the Nikon D5300 and the Nikon AF-S DX Micro-NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G, but I decided I wanted to do some more research so I cancelled the order. 



#10 Offline Barristan - Posted July 29 2017 - 8:47 AM

Barristan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 884 posts
  • LocationBindlach, Bavaria, Germany

I switched from a DSLR to a superzoom camera in 2012.

 

While it is true that you can get better results with a DSLR and a good lens your costs will skyrocket too. With just a body and a kit lens you won't be able to make any decent macro photos at all. Even with a macro lens most pictures won't become great since you can't create enough light for crisp sharp pictures with sufficient depth of field.

 

With a superzoom camera I already have a lens with a lot of focal length. To transform it into a very good macro camera you need a close-up lens. There are inexpensive ones which will produce low quality images and there are achromatic close-up lenses which will produce good macro shots. 

 

For 2012, I make almost all of my pictures with a Canon Powershot SX 50HS + Raynox DCR-250 close-up lens + Yongnuo YN 560-ii flash. I chose this camera in 2012 because at that time it had the best image quality of all super zoom cameras at iso 80. Since I use a strong flash most of my pictures aren't shot at an ISO greater than 100. 

 

EDIT: You should chose a camera which can shoot in RAW format. With RAW you have much more possibilities to correct color, brightness, contrast etc than you are going to have with jpeg. But in order to utilize the whole potential you need good image editing software too. Photoshop isn't required (but it can of course also handle raw images). There is special software for converting raw images to jpeg and for adjusting all important parameters during this process. One popular program (which I use too) is Adobe Lightroom.

Some example shots:

IMG 2376
IMG 2169
IMG 2418
IMG 2647
IMG 3482
IMG 3464
IMG 1082
IMG 1672
IMG 0032

Edited by Barristan, July 30 2017 - 4:41 AM.

  • Martialis, T.C., miwu and 3 others like this

#11 Offline VoidElecent - Posted August 9 2017 - 6:49 PM

VoidElecent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,339 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA.

Hello everyone,

 

Thank you all kindly for your advice, it is all much appreciated. I ended up buying the Nikon D3300; I thought I bought the D5300 but I was so excited, I didn't read the product title carefully enough. I was looking forward to having the D5300, but I'm glad I have the D3300; it is significantly less expensive, and offers essentially identical image quality as the D5300. I can live without the extra bells and whistles the D5300 has; they were really just a waste of money in the end.

 

The macro lens I own is the Nikon Micro-NIKKOR AF-S 40mm, and I love it. The lens is versatile, and it is perfect for what I was looking to do. Although if one day I do decide to pursue macro photography more seriously, I will definitely consider purchasing a large 85mm or 105mm lens. I work at a particle physics lab at a fairly established institution in Philadelphia, and they have the budget for all sorts of fancy optical equipment, including macro lenses. They've actually converted a NIkon D7100 and a series of extension tubes and powerful macro lenses into a microscope they use to analyze and track particles. They received a package Monday containing their newest addition to the lens tower, and decided to give me the older lens they'd be replacing.

 

The 1983 55mm Micro NIKKOR they gave me is truly beautiful; it is heavy, metal and much smoother than my 40mm and it has received some spectacular reviews on some pretty renowned photography blogs. The only issue is, it's compatibility with my D3300 is faulty; the lens seems to fit nicely into the f-bayonet socket but the LED screen displays a "lens not attached" message whenever it is hooked up. I'm going to do a little research to determine if and how I can successfully attach this lens to my camera.

 

While I do a little research about the older lens, I'll be on the lookout for a nice speedlight (or flash alternative) for my 40mm. I've posted some of my first shots on the Ant Photography thread, so remember to check it out if you are interested.

 

The only problem I seem to have right now is my ability to focus on the entire ant; it seems as though my lens tends to focus on only a portion of the body at a particular distance from the lens, and not the whole body of the ant. If anyone has any insight, it would be greatly appreciated.

 

Some pictures of the old macro lens, taken by the newer one:

 

etPiuOS.jpg

 

NxDUpZt.jpg


Edited by VoidElecent, August 9 2017 - 6:50 PM.

  • Nathant2131, Evanthomas89 and lucas3431 like this

#12 Offline RapaNui - Posted August 9 2017 - 8:21 PM

RapaNui

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts

 

 

The only problem I seem to have right now is my ability to focus on the entire ant; it seems as though my lens tends to focus on only a portion of the body at a particular distance from the lens, and not the whole body of the ant. If anyone has any insight, it would be greatly appreciated.

 

Its called Depth of Field. The higher the magnification the lower depth of field. You can try to control this by closing your aperture (higher f/numbers) or by matching the ant "plan" with your sensor plan (a side shot will allow you to have the whole side of the ant in better focus than a diagonal framing).

Remember, that everything in photography is a trade off. It will take some time until you can get a complete picture of the consequences of all the choices you can make while photographing. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.../Depth_of_field

 

https://www.dpreview...cro-photography



#13 Offline chatogaster - Posted August 9 2017 - 11:13 PM

chatogaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • LocationCopenhagen

Nice gear!

To get a bigger depth of field you can either use a smaller aperture (like RapaNui suggests), or move away from the subject, or a combination of the two. You can use the DoF calculator I linked to above to get an understanding of how it works.


Edited by chatogaster, August 9 2017 - 11:34 PM.

Camponotus herculeanus

Lasius niger

Mystery ant


#14 Offline chatogaster - Posted August 9 2017 - 11:40 PM

chatogaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • LocationCopenhagen

By the way, here are some of my macro shots taken with an iphone6s and a $65 macro lens attachment (Moment macro). No ant shots in there yet, since they're harder to light properly in their test tubes.

 

Far from perfect and the limitations of the sensor and the lens show in the photos (not to mention workflow issues like a super short 12mm working distance and not enough control over the camera), but still much better than what I expected from a tiny sensor and a cheap lens like that.


Camponotus herculeanus

Lasius niger

Mystery ant


#15 Offline VoidElecent - Posted August 10 2017 - 4:51 AM

VoidElecent

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,339 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA.

Fantastic!

 

I'll take a look at all of this Depth of Field stuff, it'll surely help a lot. I hope you guys get a chance to check out my photos on the Ant Photography Thread. Some of them are alright, but I am actively looking for advice that may help me.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users