56 replies to this topic

[Skwiggledork]

Major- my set up currently is a Nikon D610 camera, and older Nikkor 105mm F2.8 macro lens, Neewer TT560 speedlight and softbox, and A set of Mcoplus extension tubes(12mm, 20mm,36mm). I've been using the extension tubes less and less though. I Don't remember what combination of tubes I was using for this if any. Most of my decent pictures are just heavily cropped. The one I posted I actually got by accident and I didn't see her till I was about to delete the picture because the ones I was looking at were out of focus. There were about 6 or so of them dragging a stick up a log and one of them was completely off the ground and I thought it was the funniest thing ever. Just like a little sister "helping" her older siblings and just making everything harder, but she meant well. I'll have to see if I have the uncropped photo any more. I am trying to get over the bad habit of deleting the original raw files and/or just saving the cropped/edited jpegs, but that photo is only like 10% of the original if I recall.  

[Barristan]

I am quite lucky with my setup (Canon Powershot SX50 HS + Raynox DCR-250 + Yongnuo 560-ii)

 

You can do some decent pictures with that, check out my album here: 

Album: Canon Powershot SX 50HS

9 images

0 comments

 

I take all my pictures since 2012 with this setup. In total this is less than a DSLR with a kit lens and a DSLR with only a kit lens won't take good macro photos. You'll need a macro lens (with extension tubes if you plan to take pictures of small ants) or a tele lens with close-up lens like Raynox or a normal/wide angel reversely attached to the camera. Also a flash light is a must since ants move so fast. Without you will have a hard time taking sharp pictures.

[Major]

I am quite lucky with my setup (Canon Powershot SX50 HS + Raynox DCR-250 + Yongnuo 560-ii)

You can do some decent pictures with that, check out my album here:


I take all my pictures since 2012 with this setup. In total this is less than a DSLR with a kit lens and a DSLR with only a kit lens won't take good macro photos. You'll need a macro lens (with extension tubes if you plan to take pictures of small ants) or a tele lens with close-up lens like Raynox or a normal/wide angel reversely attached to the camera. Also a flash light is a must since ants move so fast. Without you will have a hard time taking sharp pictures.

What settings do you use?

Edited by Major, August 6 2018 - 3:01 PM.

[Barristan]

Why should it be grainy? The amount of pixels has nothing to do if a picture is grainy or not. A full HD image only has around 2MP. With a lot of mega pixels you can crop smaller pieces out of the original image, that is the only advantage. For display on a screen or even for printing you don't need that many mega pixels.

 

I take all my pictures in manual mode (1/1600 second, iso 80, F6.3 aperture) and I adjust the power of the flash so I get enough light.

[Skwiggledork]

 

Just as I thought I did, I only have the saved file for the cropped/edited picture of the one I posted. This was the picture before it unedited. You can see the ant I cropped to in the top right corner moving in to position.

[nurbs]

You won't get a good DSLR camera for macro photography under $600. You can get an allround "travel" DSLR camera for $600, but that won't cut it for macro use.

 

With a DSLR, there is also a bit of a learning curve with macro photography. You'll also need a tripod and possibly a focusing rack depending on how "macro" you won't to get (forget autofocus with macro, it is useless). Unless you have oodles of cash, you're wasting money and also setting yourself up for frustration.

 

Do what I tell newbies to do - if you have modern cell phone with a Sony sensor (top end Samsung and all Apple iPhones use them), get a cheap $15 macro lens adapter and pure white LED photo lamps (around $40) from Amazon and you should be good to go. Works wonders and you will get near DSLR quality at a fraction of the cost. All my YouTube videos are shot with this setup.

 

 

 

 

[Major]

Deleted

Edited by Major, August 6 2018 - 3:00 PM.

[nurbs]

 

 

I am quite lucky with my setup (Canon Powershot SX50 HS + Raynox DCR-250 + Yongnuo 560-ii)
You can do some decent pictures with that, check out my album here:
I take all my pictures since 2012 with this setup. In total this is less than a DSLR with a kit lens and a DSLR with only a kit lens won't take good macro photos. You'll need a macro lens (with extension tubes if you plan to take pictures of small ants) or a tele lens with close-up lens like Raynox or a normal/wide angel reversely attached to the camera. Also a flash light is a must since ants move so fast. Without you will have a hard time taking sharp pictures.

What settings do you use?

 

 

 

http://www.formicult...ameras/?p=99152

[Major]

Thank you everyone! This thread and all the people who have took the time and effort to reply have helped me immensely. As I am a begginer and know next to nothing about photography will probably take a few classes. I did buy a macro lens for my phone but I didn't enjoy it too much and wanted to up my game.

I would probably only use my camera for macro shots so I will take Barristan's advice about superzooms. A DSLR seems a little bit too advanced for a person who only knows how to use a phone camera. My final desicion will most likely be the Canon Powershot SX60 HS: https://tristatecame...s=&sti=27705527Raynox DCR- 250: https://tristatecame...s=&sti=27705529 Yongnuo 560-ii Flash: Yongnuo YN-560 II Speedlight Flash for Canon and Nikon. GN58. https://www.amazon.c...i_fDnABbBC70944

So it's just Barristan's setup. His photos are the exact type I am looking for and since he has been having such good luck since 2012. Thank you for sharing your setup.

And thank you everyone else for all the advice and recommendations. I will take this all into consideration when purchasing a more advanced camera in the future.

[nurbs]

Thank you everyone! This thread and all the people who have took the time and effort to reply have helped me immensely. As I am a begginer and know next to nothing about photography will probably take a few classes. I did buy a macro lens for my phone but I didn't enjoy it too much and wanted to up my game.

I would probably only use my camera for macro shots so I will take Barristan's advice about superzooms. A DSLR seems a little bit too advanced for a person who only knows how to use a phone camera. My final desicion will most likely be the Canon Powershot SX60 HS: https://tristatecame...s=&sti=27705527Raynox DCR- 250: https://tristatecame...s=&sti=27705529 Yongnuo 560-ii Flash: Yongnuo YN-560 II Speedlight Flash for Canon and Nikon. GN58. https://www.amazon.c...i_fDnABbBC70944

So it's just Barristan's setup. His photos are the exact type I am looking for and since he has been having such good luck since 2012. Thank you for sharing your setup.

And thank you everyone else for all the advice and recommendations. I will take this all into consideration when purchasing a more advanced camera in the future.

 

 

What kind of phone do you have? If you're not getting the results you want, it is most likely your lighting. That's SO IMPORTANT. The great thing about the LED lights is that it is continuous lighting, whereas a flash is not. You can position the lights how you wish in realtime and see the results.

 

Not knocking Barristan's setup, which is great, and his pics are not just the camera - he has some skill and experience and you are going to need to learn camera settings.

 

When Drew, our illustrious forum owner, first got his real nice Sony mirror-less camera, he asked me tons of questions, at times almost frustrated and raging because he couldn't figure things out.  

 

Just saying you are not going to be able to just take that camera out and get pics just like Barristan. I looked up the Canon SX60 camera, and it is uses the same kind of small sensor on phones, so image quality will be similar, if not less (it's not a Sony sensor, but one made by Canon).

[Major]

Thank you everyone! This thread and all the people who have took the time and effort to reply have helped me immensely. As I am a begginer and know next to nothing about photography will probably take a few classes. I did buy a macro lens for my phone but I didn't enjoy it too much and wanted to up my game.
I would probably only use my camera for macro shots so I will take Barristan's advice about superzooms. A DSLR seems a little bit too advanced for a person who only knows how to use a phone camera. My final desicion will most likely be the Canon Powershot SX60 HS: https://tristatecame...s=&sti=27705527Raynox DCR- 250: https://tristatecame...s=&sti=27705529 Yongnuo 560-ii Flash: Yongnuo YN-560 II Speedlight Flash for Canon and Nikon. GN58. https://www.amazon.c...i_fDnABbBC70944
So it's just Barristan's setup. His photos are the exact type I am looking for and since he has been having such good luck since 2012. Thank you for sharing your setup.
And thank you everyone else for all the advice and recommendations. I will take this all into consideration when purchasing a more advanced camera in the future.

 
 
What kind of phone do you have? If you're not getting the results you want, it is most likely your lighting. That's SO IMPORTANT. The great thing about the LED lights is that it is continuous lighting, whereas a flash is not. You can position the lights how you wish in realtime and see the results.
 
Not knocking Barristan's setup, which is great, and his pics are not just the camera - he has some skill and experience and you are going to need to learn camera settings.
 
When Drew, our illustrious forum owner, first got his real nice Sony mirror-less camera, he asked me tons of questions, at times almost frustrated and raging because he couldn't figure things out.  
 
Just saying you are not going to be able to just take that camera out and get pics just like Barristan. I looked up the Canon SX60 camera, and it is uses the same kind of small sensor on phones, so image quality will be similar, if not less (it's not a Sony sensor, but one made by Canon).

I understand that I won't just be able to pick up a camera and start taking amazing photos. I also know that lighting is a HUGE part of photography. I'm currently trying to do a bit of reading up on photography and I will hopefully take some classes. I agree, clip on macro lenses are great for their price, but what annoys me is that the focus distance is very low, so I have to hunch over my subject, thus covering it in shadow. I use one of my family members phones as all my devices have terrible cameras. I use an iPhone X which I have to admit, has a very good camera. I'm getting better results with a magnifying glass then a macro lens. I can't light properly with a macro lens. And not all of my subject is in focus.

Magnifying Glass:


Macro Lens:


See the difference? Neither photo is very good but I think that the magnifying glass had a better result.

[CoolColJ]

You don't need classes, you just need to experiment and takes a ton of photos. Try different settings and observe the results, increment the setting and improve as you go.

And read a lot, everything you need is on the net

 

Look at the my journal from the start, the pics go from total novice with point and shoot auto settings to experienced G85 with manual settings

Edited by CoolColJ, August 6 2018 - 4:33 PM.

[nurbs]

Haha you have an iPhone X? I would take that over the Canon SX60 anyday. Not at home right now (writing this from iphone), but I can show you what you’re doing wrong. It has nothing to do with your gear.

Also, those clipon macro adapters are just magnifying glasses. Same with the Raynor.

[Barristan]

The problem with smartphone is that you can't trigger a flash so easily. Compared to a strong flash the integrated LED is not very bright. So you can't shoot pictures at lowest iso settings and at short shutter speed so you get sharp pictures. Pictures will always look a little bit blurry (of course depending on how quick the ants move) With a flash you'll always freeze the motion.

 

Also the quality of the smartphone "macro lenses" can't compete to achromatic lenses made for example by Raynox, Canon etc.

Edited by Barristan, August 7 2018 - 3:57 AM.

[Batspiderfish]

Not being able to take good macro for under $600 is kind of an outrageous statement. With proper use of equipment, you can get quality macro by stapling garbage together. This person wants a closer look at their ants -- I don't think they're trying to kit themselves out for NatGeo.

[Barristan]

My setup was new (in 2012) less than 600€.

 

- Camera: 350€

- Raynox DCR-250: 50€

- Flash: 60€

- Softbox: 20 €

 

= 480€, or 80 € per year

Of course you can start a lot cheaper by buying a used camera. I sold my DSLR because it was only with kit lens more expensive. 

 

National Geographic equipment would be several thousand €/$, just look what Alex Wild uses. But in my opinion the higher your current quality is the more you have to pay to only increase quality a little bit. That's why I won't invest into a camera system with exchangeable lenses anymore.

 

Next camera would be probably a Panasonic FZ2000 or it's successor. This camera could both replace my camera + camcorder, since it takes both very good stills and videos.

Edited by Barristan, August 7 2018 - 9:37 AM.

[nurbs]

Not being able to take good macro for under $600 is kind of an outrageous statement. With proper use of equipment, you can get quality macro by stapling garbage together. This person wants a closer look at their ants -- I don't think they're trying to kit themselves out for NatGeo.

 

Right, you can do it properly for well under $50, and that's what I'm trying to tell the OP.

 

You're putting words in my mouth. You can't get good macro DSLR for under $600. The larger sensors on a DLSR makes it much harder to get a wider DOF, therefore you need more expensive lenses to compensate, which in turn also makes holding them and positioning them closer to the subject even more difficult. Even if you invest in cheap alternative solutions like extension tubes and front element macro devices for the DSLR, it's still much more than a cell phone macro setup. Couple that with the learning curve of just not learning to use a DLSR but using it as a macro camera makes things difficult for a beginner.

[nurbs]

The problem with smartphone is that you can't trigger a flash so easily. Compared to a strong flash the integrated LED is not very bright. So you can't shoot pictures at lowest iso settings and at short shutter speed so you get sharp pictures. Pictures will always look a little bit blurry (of course depending on how quick the ants move) With a flash you'll always freeze the motion.

 

Also the quality of the smartphone "macro lenses" can't compete to achromatic lenses made for example by Raynox, Canon etc.

 

You never use the integrated LED flash on the cell phone. Did you read my suggestion to the OP?

 

You can call the Raynox "achromatic" lenses or whatever, but I've tried them all, and they are all essentially magnifying glasses that reduce the minimum focusing distance on a lens. When you buy Raynox, you're paying for the name and the "made in Japan" label. Not trying to be difficult with you, but I'm a working photographer and have been doing this for over two decades and have tried all kinds of macro devices for DSLRs.

 

You can either get:

1) a macro lens

2) extension tubes

3) front element macro magnifyers (like the Raynox)

4) or you can combine all three

5) then you also need a proper flash or lighting setup, as well as a tripod, or a focusing rack if you are super close and plan on stacking the images

6) you also need photoshop if you're going to stack the images or do post work

 

That's why I'm trying to tell the OP that his iphone X is more than enough to do what he needs.

 

[nurbs]

Major -

 

Get this for your iPhone X. This is what I use to shoot all macro, video, and even regular photography. 

 

It's an app that allows full manual control of your phone's camera. The app that comes with the iphone sucks for macro work. With this app, you can learn all about the relationship between shutter speed/ISO/aperture as well as separating your focus and exposure control. It even captures images in RAW format (on a cell phone!) which allows you to edit in Lightroom and Photoshop.

 

Can't turn this thread into a "how to tutorial" because I'm crazy busy, but this should get you started. And guess what? It's only $5.99. Look how much money I saved you.

 

https://itunes.apple...d694647259?mt=8

[Major]

As I said before. This is not my phone. I won't have full access to it at all times so that's the exact reason I need a camera. It's one of my family members phone and they aren't too keen on letting me using it for my ant obsession. All of my devices have terrible cameras. But thanks anyway nurbs! It was highly appreciated.