Macro lens for micro moths?

[Dave McCormick]

I got a bit of money for christmas and wanted to know what a good macro lens for my Canon 400D would be for taking decent close up photos of micro moths? There are many around where I live and want to study them a bit during the next year.

I don't want to go too much, anything under £250-£300 would be good, but I may go as far as 300 if needed.

Merry Christmas all

[JKT]

For most micro moths something like 2x should suffice, though some may require even 3x. There is always MP-E65, but that is a bit expensive. I would think your best bet would be 2x teleconverter. For slightly better magnification you could combine that with an extension tube set. The latter alone is not enough for most of them.

Then there is the question of light. At those magnifications you will need a good tripod or a flash system - preferably both. If you don't have those, your budget is seriously shot. Theoretically it is possible to use the built-in flash, but it does not work well with the extension tubes: the lens causes a shadow. There are some - mostly DIY - diffuser systems that may help, but I don't know how effective those are.

[NickB]

No doubt that it costs a lot to get a lens to cover micro-moths. Teleconverter is a reasonable option. I have had trouble choosing since most teleconverters (other than Nikon) are for prime lenses in the 200mm+ range; 100mm is a minimum - and I have a Tamron 90mm...can't find a UK stockist of the Tamron 1.4Pro Teleconverter

Has anyone had experience of the new Tamron VC Super-zoom Macro....?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Pres ... lease.aspx

This gives 1:3.5x image ratio at the max and the VC should give you some more f-stops to work with - in theory. Worth a look at £200+ less than the Canon 1-5x....?
N

[Dave McCormick]

Hi

I am thinking of getting a Teleconverter, but I don't really know much about them. I was thinking of getting a sigma one to put behind my Sigma 105mm Macro lens, anyone know a good place online to get one? I tried searching for one, but I guess I was searching wrong as I could not find much, or if anything.

[JKT]

This gives 1:3.5x image ratio at the max and the VC should give you some more f-stops to work with - in theory. Worth a look at £200+ less than the Canon 1-5x....?

The Tamron is a superzoom with max magnification of 1:3.5, while the Canon is specialty lens with max magnification of 5:1. A bit different animals or did you mean something else?

I was thinking of getting a sigma one to put behind my Sigma 105mm Macro lens, anyone know a good place online to get one?

Always a good place to start: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/shop/278/ ... rters.html. The interesting thing is they don't list 105/2.8 as compatible with the convertors. I don't know why. Maybe one of the better Kenkos?

[Dave McCormick]

Hmm, I went on that like: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/shop/278/ ... rters.html but it appears as a blank page when I try and view it. Maybe its my Internet Explorer 8

[JKT]

That's weird. The link works for both Firefox 3.0.5 and IE 7.

[NickB]

Sorry - the Canon is a 5x magnification macro - highly specialised and with v small dof but great quality
The Tamron is capable of 3.5x magnification; it claims to be have macro capability tho' image quality may be compromised compared to prime.
I have heard very little about these newer Tamron VC lenses or seen any images.
You get what you pay for...
N

[JKT]

The Tamron is capable of 3.5x magnification

Nope. The Tamron is capable of 0.2857x magnification (1:3.5=.2857).

[Rogerdodge]

Nick

I think you are getting your magnification ratios confused.

The Tamron lens will do 1:3.5 magnification.
This means that a 122.5 mm (76mm Canon crop, 82mm Nikon crop, 61mm Olympus crop) subject will fill the frame on 35mm film. Not very impressive - most modern zoom lenses will do this.

1:1, achievable by most modern Macro lenses means that a 35mm (21.9mm Canon crop, 23.3mm Nikon crop, 17.5mm Olympus crop) object will fill the frame on a 35mm camera.

I think you think that the Tamron lens is actually a 3.5:1 magnification.
This would mean a 10mm object would fill the frame of a 35mm film (6.25mm Canon crop, 6.66mm Nikon crop, 5mm Olympus crop).
It would be brilliant, but doesn't exist.

The Canon 1-5:1 lens will take a picture with anything from 35mm to 7mm (21.9mm to 4.4mm, Canon crop) filling the frame.
But it will ONLY do this - you cannot photograph a tree, or a portrait for example.
It is, in effect, a 60mm lens with an adjustable extension tube.

Have I made this clear?
(Any lack of clarity here is due to the teeniest glass of wine I just had!!)

Roger

[Dave McCormick]

Hi Roger,

I kinda got what your saying, but I am tired now so I guess I'll have a look at what you wrote again when I am wide awake.

Anyone know about the Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro Lens? would this be good for what I want?

[JKT]

Unfortunately it isn't any better than the Sigma 105/2.8. In the basic configuration it goes only to 1:2 magnification - you need a dedicated extension tube in order to reach 1:1. You could probably add a set of normal extension tubes after that and get close to 2:1 magnification, but the prices add up...

[Rogerdodge]

Dave
I would think that the best method on a limited budget, for photographing macro moths would be-
Look on E-Bay for a Canon EF 50mm lens. F1.8 is fine, about £50 to £70.
Look on E-Bay for a set of Auto Extension Tubes (£72 for Kenko) - avoid the non-auto ones at £5 or less!
Attach to camera and build a flash extender out of cardboard and silver foil http://www.pixalo.com/community/tutoria ... 24240.html (thanks to marcinklysewicz)
That ought to do it.
Roger

[eccles]

You mentioned the possibility of getting a Sigma teleconverter to use with your 105mm macro. Don't, because it won't work. The 105 macro has a rear element that extends level with the camera mount. Unfortunately, so does the front element of the TC, so there will be insufficient clearance between the two to allow them to be used together. I have the Kenko 1.4x Pro300 which has the required clearance, is good quality and works fine with my Sigma 105mm. But it only gives 1.4:1 macro. If you require more than this I would suggest getting a set of extension tubes, (Kenko have a good reputation) and see how you get on with using them with your 105mm. If you find you need still higher magnification then using a shorter focal length prime such as the Canon 50mm F1.8 in conjunction with tubes as Roger suggests may enable you to get closer.

[NickB]

Nick

I think you are getting your magnification ratios confused.

Roger

Thanks! Enjoy the wine...I think I have!

[JKT]

The 105 macro has a rear element that extends level with the camera mount. Unfortunately, so does the front element of the TC, so there will be insufficient clearance between the two to allow them to be used together.

I see. What would happen if one added a narrow extension tube between the two? The solution might work, but it wouldn't focus at infinity. Then again, that is not the objective here. It should still focus far enough for butterflies (roughly 90 cm).

There is also a recommended order for combining extension tubes and teleconverter. Anybody remember which way it was? If the extension should be between camera and teleconverter, the system would be quite funny in case of Kenko set; first the two longer tubes, then the teleconverter, then the shortest tube and finally the lens itself.

[Dave McCormick]

I found a Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II Lens for just over £60 is this the lens you mentioned Roger?

Anyone know how the f2.5 macro version is? I don't need to get very close to these moths, just close enough to get a decent shot of the tiny moths, like these on UKMoths:

[LCPete]

Dave
I would think that the best method on a limited budget, for photographing macro moths would be-
Look on E-Bay for a Canon EF 50mm lens. F1.8 is fine, about £50 to £70.
Look on E-Bay for a set of Auto Extension Tubes (£72 for Kenko) - avoid the non-auto ones at £5 or less!
Attach to camera and build a flash extender out of cardboard and silver foil http://www.pixalo.com/community/tutoria ... 24240.html (thanks to marcinklysewicz)
That ought to do it.
Roger

I agree you dont need teleconverters, extension tubes are what you need
I use the Jessops ones with my Sigma 105 and agree you do need flash
Pete

[JKT]

I don't need to get very close to these moths, just close enough to get a decent shot of the tiny moths, like these on UKMoths:

Oh dear! You dont' ask much, do you? The last one is probably a whopping 3 mm long!

[Dave McCormick]

ok, maybe 3mm is a bit tiny... Thanks for all your advice anyway, I'll see what I can come up with