macro or close up filters?

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:19:28 GMT, DHB wrote:

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 02:48:18 GMT, Roger Halstead
wrote:

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:45:57 +0200, WhaleShark
wrote:

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.

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)
www.rogerhalstead.com.


The only ones available to me are these:

http://www.wholesaledigital.co.za/cu.htm

and

http://www.wholesaledigital.co.za/200252w.htm

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.

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,

A _whole_lot :-))

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

It can be frustrating/exasperating/

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.

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)
www.rogerhalstead.com

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

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

(I like the rails idea.)

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
excellent.

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.

Cheers,