OMG.......MACRO HARDER THAN I THOUGHT!!!!!!

PhotoPig · Oct 19, 2004

Greetings and Salutations........

Well today for my birthday I went to NYC to purchase my first macro lens. I have really admired all the macros posted on here, and thought that I would try my hand at this "art form". Ive been pretty successful at sports / landscape photography, so I said "what the heck....how hard can this be?"..........Well......... :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: its a lot harder than I anticipated. I have a 300D, and just purchased a Sigma 105 mm EX DG 2.8. MAN alot of my subjects are out of focus. Depth of field.....lighting....MAN alot to learn here. I thought I'd be ok outside without a flash, but apparently not. Will a standard shoe mount flash help or do I need an all out ring mount flash to help in my exposures? MAN and I thought that I would get closer shots with this lens..........extension tubes???? Thoughts / comments P L E A S E!

Thanks and GO YANKEES!

Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. - Winston Churchill

Walt · Oct 19, 2004

Make sure you use a tripod so you can make longer exposures with greater depth of field. Rather than use a flash you can opt for a reflector.

Digital Matt · Oct 19, 2004

For macros you are going to be stopping down lots to get enough dof. Like Walt said, you'll need a tripod, because if you are shooting still lifes, you're exposures can go over 1 second. If you are shooting insects and flowers that could potentially move, either bump your ISO, or get a flash I'm afraid.

Is that a 1:1 macro lens? 1:1 is pretty close, but if you want to get closer, Canon makes a special 5:1 macro lens, but it's expensive. Extension tubes are a cheap alternative. I have the Kenko set and they work great, although with a 105mm lens and 3 extension tubes, the front of the lens will go right on top of your subject almost, so light will be a problem. I've used them with my 50mm, and the closest focusing point was probably 1/8 inch

mentos_007 · Oct 19, 2004

to be honest I prefer macro with flash but you have to close your apperture really!!

ferny · Oct 20, 2004

I've just read a book about close-up work. I think it's from the 70's but most of it is still relevant. They mentioned on-board flash in it. The problem with on-board flashes is that they're designed to work within a certain field. If you're too far away from a subject the flash doesn't reach it. If you're too close it'll be too strong and wash it out. It will also give you uneven coverage with hotspots. You can work around it by using a diffuser on your flash. Tracing paper will work and can also be layered.

I have no experience of this though. The majority of my macro work is with a reversed lens on my digital and it blocks the flash.

You have an advantage though. Use your white balance settings on your camera. If you need more light, grab a few desk lamps. Try to light the subject from the side to. You'll want shadow to show texture. That is a big downside of a ring flash. It gives you an even light all over the subject. That's fine for coins and such. But it removes the shadows which show the texture and shape of an object.