Beginner Macro Lady Bug

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
Well, I don't have the gear or the know how most of you have. All I have is a Mamiya-Macro-Sekor (Tomioka) 60mm f/2.8 adapted to my 5D mark III and I have to hand hold (But I have a bellows on the way). It is an old (50 years old) M42 screw mount lens, manual focus, and no IS. So here's my first attempt. The lens will achieve 1:1, I just have to learn how to use it properly and get a light so I can get in closer. The plant was swaying in a light breeze, so I had to take several shots to get the timing right for focus. The colors are straight out of the camera. Not a bad lens for $20. I'll try again when the bellows gets here... also 50 years old but new and in the box for $15 (Pentax).

This was at f/2.8 and I probably should have stopped down a little. Still learning.

By the way, can anyone recommend a rail to mount the bellows unit on for my tripod? I'm thinking I need everything real rigid so a long plate to attach the bellows to and then attach that to the tripod.
 

Attachments

  • Mac 4 web.jpg
    Mac 4 web.jpg
    446.7 KB · Views: 184
  • Mac 1 web.jpg
    Mac 1 web.jpg
    491.6 KB · Views: 167
  • Bug.jpg
    Bug.jpg
    627.1 KB · Views: 172
  • fly.jpg
    fly.jpg
    550.6 KB · Views: 172
The pictures are good but the first two I can't even call close-up. The third one is a good close-up, but not true macro. From 0.5x to 1x magnification you can call it a close-up photo while true macro begins at 1x (lifesize) magnification. To achieve high magnification with a short focal length lens you have to get very close to your subject. The Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro has a minimum focusing distance of 20 cm. It means that the working distance – the distance of the subject from the front of the lens – is about 10 cm.
For macro photography there are two main problems: the shallow depth of field and the lack of light. To achieve a higher DoF I suggest you to use an aperture between f/8 and f/16. Due to the lack of light you have to be ready to use long shutter speeds (from 1/10 seconds to 4+ seconds) therefore you will need a stable tripod an a relatively static subject. You can try to use flash to reduce the shutter speed but I don't really like the photos taken with flash.
To see some macro you can check out my photos on Flickr. :)
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
SkynetTX said:
The pictures are good but the first two I can't even call close-up. The third one is a good close-up, but not true macro. From 0.5x to 1x magnification you can call it a close-up photo while true macro begins at 1x (lifesize) magnification. To achieve high magnification with a short focal length lens you have to get very close to your subject. The Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro has a minimum focusing distance of 20 cm. It means that the working distance – the distance of the subject from the front of the lens – is about 10 cm.
For macro photography there are two main problems: the shallow depth of field and the lack of light. To achieve a higher DoF I suggest you to use an aperture between f/8 and f/16. Due to the lack of light you have to be ready to use long shutter speeds (from 1/10 seconds to 4+ seconds) therefore you will need a stable tripod an a relatively static subject. You can try to use flash to reduce the shutter speed but I don't really like the photos taken with flash.
To see some macro you can check out my photos on Flickr. :)

The third photo is actually a crop of the first. :) They are actually all crops.

My lens is a FF lens with a minimum focus distance of 23.5 cm. I'll probably get a 100mm f/4 Macro Takumar next.

Things will get better here shortly. My bellows came in today. In a couple of weeks I'll have a light and get this mounted up on a tripod or bean bag. Then I'll look for an ant hill or something. Done correctly, one wouldn't be able to tell a subject was lit by artificial light or not.

This wasn't really an attempt at getting spider's eyes or anything. I was walking around hand held and just checking out my "new" lens from 1966. Awesome color and looks like it will be very sharp on a tripod.

Thanks for the information. :)
 
Upvote 0