Lens Magnification

[IronMaskDuval]

If I want to take crazy close ups of spiders, do I get a dioptre? I saw an image on flickr that had a 10x magnification. Pointers?

 

[Mike_E]

A macro lens or extension tubes.

A long time a go (in a galaxy far..) I used to use the tubes and an old push pull telephoto. I'd get up close and get the subject about the size in the frame I wanted and use the zoom to focus the depth of field.

 

[pgriz]

A diopter can get you the magnification, but the image quality, not so much. When you get to 1:1 or better scales, you also need (usually): a tripod with a good head, a focusing rail, a shutter release, an off-camera flash (or two), wiring/triggers to fire the flash, diffusers to reduce the harshness of the light... Given that the DOF is so thin with higher magnifications, frequently the really good images are made by compositing many photos into one using stacking software. That's when you're using a DSLR which can accept macro lenses. In your case, your camera will accept a diopter, and you will get closer to your subjects. Depending on your skill level (and the available light), you may get some pretty decent closeups. But for true macro shots, you will need more specialized equipment.

 

[Overread14 2]

Master 1:1 macro photography first. Get a good control over focusing, composing and lighting. I say that because macro photography beyond 1:1 gets really hard really fast.


Increasing magnification there are a few options depending on what you want:

1) Diopters/macro lens attachments/macro filters (same thing people just call them different things). These all work by reducing your focusing distances, both your minimum and maximum. As a result the lens might only be able to focus a few inches away at best. They give the most magnification gain when used on longer focal length lenses.

Raynox (eg their DCR 250) produce a very high quality series with varying powers up to some very high diopter ratings. Canon also produces the 500D and 250D (the 250 is the more powerful) and are again high quality options.

Avoid cheap filters - you'll see them sold in packs with a group of them at a fairly low price - avoid! Most are very low grade single element optics that, whilst they work, will seriously degrade your image quality. (these are the ones most people encounter and earn them a very bad reputation)

2) Teleconverters - if the lens will physically mount to them you can use teleconverters to boost magnification. The gain is the same as the magnification ratio of the teleconverter, so on a 1:1 macro a 1.4TC would take you to 1.4:1 and a 2*TC would take you to 2:1.
Remember that teleconverters have a protruding front element and as such are physically restricted as to what lenses they can and cannot mount to. Kenko Pro series have the flattest front element protrusion whilst retaining high quality optics (go for the pro line only - avoid the cheaper Kenko line).

Personally I will often use a 1.4TC on a macro lens - I find that it gives a nice boost that helps resolve the segmented eyes on many flies, whilst at the same time having little impact on shooting difficulty and optical performance (esp when the lens is being shot at f13 and similar small apertures).

3) Extension tubes - work the same as diopters, but give more magnification (per unit of extension tube added) on shorter focal length lenses. I would generally say that at 100mm you're at the middle point for choosing between diopters and extension tubes; however if you want to go more extreme I would go for diopters. Adding anything more than the standard 65mm that comes in a complete set of Kenko extension tubes starts to get rather difficult to handle.


But first get a handle on 1:1 - then I'd suggest a 1.4TC if you can - 1.4:1 is a very nice working magnification. From there the sky is the limit - if you can get hold of things like the Raynox MSN 505 and the like which very high diopter ratings.

 

[IronMaskDuval]

I have both a 60mm and a 105mm 1:1, and I can usually get pretty close to my subject without a tripod, but I see some crazy upclose of spiders and wanted to see how. I follow a guy on flickr, and he used a 10x magnifier. I just wasn't sure if he was using a tele or a dioptre.

 

[IronMaskDuval]

Master 1:1 macro photography first. Get a good control over focusing, composing and lighting. I say that because macro photography beyond 1:1 gets really hard really fast.


Increasing magnification there are a few options depending on what you want:

1) Diopters/macro lens attachments/macro filters (same thing people just call them different things). These all work by reducing your focusing distances, both your minimum and maximum. As a result the lens might only be able to focus a few inches away at best. They give the most magnification gain when used on longer focal length lenses.

Raynox (eg their DCR 250) produce a very high quality series with varying powers up to some very high diopter ratings. Canon also produces the 500D and 250D (the 250 is the more powerful) and are again high quality options.

Avoid cheap filters - you'll see them sold in packs with a group of them at a fairly low price - avoid! Most are very low grade single element optics that, whilst they work, will seriously degrade your image quality. (these are the ones most people encounter and earn them a very bad reputation)

2) Teleconverters - if the lens will physically mount to them you can use teleconverters to boost magnification. The gain is the same as the magnification ratio of the teleconverter, so on a 1:1 macro a 1.4TC would take you to 1.4:1 and a 2*TC would take you to 2:1.
Remember that teleconverters have a protruding front element and as such are physically restricted as to what lenses they can and cannot mount to. Kenko Pro series have the flattest front element protrusion whilst retaining high quality optics (go for the pro line only - avoid the cheaper Kenko line).

Personally I will often use a 1.4TC on a macro lens - I find that it gives a nice boost that helps resolve the segmented eyes on many flies, whilst at the same time having little impact on shooting difficulty and optical performance (esp when the lens is being shot at f13 and similar small apertures).

3) Extension tubes - work the same as diopters, but give more magnification (per unit of extension tube added) on shorter focal length lenses. I would generally say that at 100mm you're at the middle point for choosing between diopters and extension tubes; however if you want to go more extreme I would go for diopters. Adding anything more than the standard 65mm that comes in a complete set of Kenko extension tubes starts to get rather difficult to handle.


But first get a handle on 1:1 - then I'd suggest a 1.4TC if you can - 1.4:1 is a very nice working magnification. From there the sky is the limit - if you can get hold of things like the Raynox MSN 505 and the like which very high diopter ratings.

Thanks!

 

[Overread14 2]

Can you link to the shot? 10*magnification sounds like a lot but if the person is shooting with something like a bridge camera it might not be as much as you think. 10:1 magnification is insane - you're well into the realms of very very very hard photography.

 

[Overread14 2]

As an idea this is 3:1 on a small jumping spider

 

[IronMaskDuval]

I couldn't find the exact picture but it's this guy.

 

[480sparky38 37]

A macro lens or extension tubes.

A long time a go (in a galaxy far..) I used to use the tubes and an old push pull telephoto. I'd get up close and get the subject about the size in the frame I wanted and use the zoom to focus the depth of field.

10x is best done with a bellows.

 

[IronMaskDuval]

A macro lens or extension tubes.

A long time a go (in a galaxy far..) I used to use the tubes and an old push pull telephoto. I'd get up close and get the subject about the size in the frame I wanted and use the zoom to focus the depth of field.

10x is best done with a bellows.

I'm too cool to be seen walking around with a bellow. So much for my 10x goals of 2014.

 

[TheFantasticG]

Canon 65mm MPE @ 5:1 is not easy to work with. 10:1 ... Man, that's a job.

 

[IronMaskDuval]

I went all 4x and sh*t, and this is what I got. D*mn, it's hard.

 

[pgriz]

That's why all the extra gear is needed. When you're at 1:1 or more, you've got too little light (so flash becomes almost a necessity), every motion of either subject or camera is magnified (flash helps here, by using a very brief pulse of light), the DOF is extremely thin (so getting the focus on what you want requires tools such as the tripod, good head, and a rail), ... and so on. Macro is a difficult area to do well in.

 

[IronMaskDuval]

Well, it seems that the 4x didn't do me any favor other than allowing me to focus further away. Not quite what I'm looking for. Am I noobish dreaming?