macro or close up filters?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by WhaleShark, Jul 20, 2004.

  1. WhaleShark

    WhaleShark Guest

    For an amateur hobbyist wanting to shoot insects, which is better,
    close up filters or macro lens? (Bearing in mind that the macro lens
    is more than double the price of the filters.

    The only ones available to me are these:


    for a wide angle lens containing a macro lens.

    Your help will be appreciated!

    PS: These will be used with a Canon A70 and DC52C adapter ring.


    QUIPd 1.02: (433 of 679)
    -> A bird in the hand is messy.

    My photo albums:
    WhaleShark, Jul 20, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. WhaleShark

    DSphotog Guest


    I think you must mean life size on a full frame sensor, correct?

    With a Nikon, for example, you have to apply the 1.5 crop factor and the
    image captured will actually appear 1.5:1.

    Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

    DSphotog, Jul 20, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. WhaleShark

    DSphotog Guest

    My self correcting filter just kicked in. Life size is after all, life size
    isn't it.

    Sorry for the incorrect post.

    DSphotog, Jul 20, 2004
  4. As has been already said several times the macro is better, but there
    is an inexpensive alternative for cameras with interchangeable lenses
    although it only works *close* and that is a "reverse adapter". it is
    nothing more than an adapter ring that has the proper camera mount on
    one side and threads for the filter ring on the other. They work
    quite well for very close work. OTOH they are strictly manual, or I
    should say I've never seen one that wasn't manual only. I don't see
    how they'd be able to do the linking.

    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    Roger Halstead, Jul 21, 2004
  5. WhaleShark

    DHB Guest

    A reverse mounted lens does work very well but as pointed out,
    you must get "VERY" close & depth of field is very narrow. I have
    used this method with my Canon A70 with both it's focus manually set
    to infinity & likewise for the reversed EF 50mm f1.8 II lens that I
    used. Focus then becomes a function of moving a tiny bit closer or
    further from your subject. Even with both lens set to infinity, a
    manually selected smallest aperture (f8), the A70 set to full
    telephoto (max. zoom), you still have to hold very steady (tripod if
    possible) & have very good lighting.

    Because you must get so close, the camera/lenses/you can block
    the lighting so having a small reflector or 2 to redirect sunlight on
    your target helps a lot (I use a piece of a silver car window sun
    shield as a cheap homemade reflector). If you have lot's of patients,
    this method can yield incredible results at very reasonable expense,
    however if you don't have lots of patience, you will very quickly give
    up on this approach. I'm strongly considering building some type of
    fine focus rail to mount the camera & lenses on so I can mount it all
    on a tripod & focus by moving everything in/our with close precision
    via the focusing rail adjustment.

    Macro is a whole new world, I have a few pictures of tiny ants
    that came to collect a little bit of sugar I placed outside. They
    look like giant ants climbing a mound of raw uncut diamonds, which was
    the tiny sugar granules.

    A quality Macro lens like Canon's EF 100mm f2.8, if you have a
    compatible camera is worth the investment "if" Macro is more than just
    a curiosity. For me, I am not yet done exploring with what I have but
    if I chosse to continue in macro photography on a regular basis, a
    Canon Macro EF 100mm f2.8 will be on my wish list to add to my Digital
    Rebel/300D. Hope something I offered proves helpful.

    Respectfully, DHB
    DHB, Jul 21, 2004
  6. WhaleShark

    WhaleShark Guest

    Thank you Joseph, at last I understand what dpFWIW was trying to tell
    me. (I'm a bit dense sometimes) I guess the filters will work fine for
    my application.

    Thanks again!


    QUIPd 1.02: (445 of 679)
    -> If you want to feel rich, just count all of the things you have
    -> that money can't buy.--Anonymous

    My photo albums:
    WhaleShark, Jul 21, 2004
  7. WhaleShark

    WhaleShark Guest

    Very useful, thank you. You have given me some ideas to try too!

    (I like the rails idea.)


    QUIPd 1.02: (197 of 679)
    -> If You Can't Learn To Do Something Well, Learn to Enjoy Doing It
    -> Poorly.

    My photo albums:
    WhaleShark, Jul 21, 2004
  8. A _whole_lot <:))
    It can be frustrating/exasperating/
    Which reminds me, there is also the bellows extension for cameras
    using interchangeable lenses. It's more expensive than the reverse
    adapter, but more versatile. OTOH it can be as exasperating as the
    reverse adapter. Maybe more so as the exposure changes with the amount
    of extension. Again, depth of field is shallow

    To me, both are tripod and cable release configurations. Then again,
    I don't use the tripod as often as I should with regular photography.

    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    Roger Halstead, Jul 21, 2004
  9. WhaleShark

    Peter Gordon Guest

    I have a Velbon Macro Slider which gives about
    12 cm of forward-backward motion and 5 cm of
    sideways motion. It mounts on my tripod and,
    apart from causing a little imbalance is

    I think tha Manfropto (sp?) also make one.
    It is much more fnely engineered and much more
    expensive. I don't find the engineering of the
    Velbon limiting.

    Peter Gordon, Jul 22, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.