Close up

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

4000'er

New member
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
134
Reaction score
14
Location
Manchester, NH
Here’s my first attempt at real close up photography. My students were collecting some native life to put in a mini-ecosystems we were building. I’ve had a lens reversing ring in my bag for years and had never really given it a go, so I thought this would be a good opportunity. FYI: a lens reversing ring is just that, it has a bayonet mount on one side and 52mm (in my case) threads on the other. You mount the lens “backwards” with the lens mount facing out. I used an old 24mm film lens on my D2h. It does let you get in close, but you lose all automatic settings. You even have to manually stop down the lens after focusing and before you shoot. I shot the images at a 250th @ f22 with 2- SB800’s on manual for light. I was amazed that the grasshopper let me get so close to him without jumping off. It must have been a good snack.
Anyone into close ups? What do you use?

sm-grasshopper.jpg

sm-bug.jpg

sm-milkweed.jpg
 
Good work.

I have used a reverse lens mount, diopters (that mount on the front of the lens like filters), extension tubes (that mount between the lens and camera), a bellows, and a macro lenses. All can produce good close up photos.

The reverse mount is the low cost, yet a good quality solution. But as you noted, you do lose you automation.

The diopters are light weight, efficient to use, low cost, will maintain all auto features, but are often relatively inferior quality compared to a good camera and lens. They function like a magnifying glass. This is the lowest quality solution.

I most often carry a set of Kenko extension tubes which preserves all of my camera's auto focus and exposure features. The tubes are becoming more expensive as the cameras become more sophisticated, however, they are still much less expensive than good macro lenses. The tubes are light weight and convenient to carry. Since they fit between the camera and lens you can use them with all of your lenses (although they may be impractical with some). Since they contain no optical elements you do not compromise the quality of your lenses. Also there is generally no disadvantage in using an OEM rather than your camera's brand. Just be sure it is the right fit for your camera's mount and will maintain all of your desired auto features. They function by moving the lens elements closer to the subject which enables the closer focus - it is same basic operational principal of a macro lens.

A bellows is the same concept as the extension tubes, but with more flexibility. It allows for a continuously adjustable amount of extension. You can finely zoom in just the right amount of extension. It is the bulky solution, not very practical for taking on a hike. The bellows could be easily damaged in transit. Often you lose automation with a bellows. I have often thought that it should be possible to engineer a "zoom" auto extension tube, however, the automation features might become prohibitively complex.

A quality macro lens will produce the best quality photographs, but at the highest cost and most weight. But to no surprise you do benefit from what you are willing to pay and carry.
 
Last edited:
The top photo is a grasshopper, the bottom is a milkweed bug in its first instar, any ideas about the middle? It was found in a pond. It is a larva of some kind.
 
4000'er said:
The top photo is a grasshopper, the bottom is a milkweed bug in its first instar, any ideas about the middle? It was found in a pond. It is a larva of some kind.

Could be a "perch bug", aka dragonfly nymph. I could tell better from the profile... we used to find them on the edges of ponds under soggy leaves and use them for trout bait. They worked well...

Tim
 
That last shot makes me think it's a caddis fly larva. It's the only larva I know of that makes cases out of silk and bits of vegetation.

(Was that what you meant? Katydids have only incomplete metamorphosis - nymphs, but no larvae.)
 
Last edited:
Dual Element Diopters

Mark Schaefer said:
The diopters are light weight, efficient to use, low cost, will maintain all auto features, but are often relatively inferior quality compared to a good camera and lens. They function like a magnifying glass. This is the lowest quality solution.

Nikon (3T,4T,and 5T) and a few others make dual-element achromat close-up screw-on lenses which yield high enough quality for professional photographers - these give much better results than the single element type.

I first read about them in John Shaw's "Closeps in Nature" ( which anyone who wants to become proficient at closeups should read, regardless of how dated it is) back in the 90's, and have been using them ever since with great results. One of these coupled with a 70-200 zoom that has a 62mm (or 52mm) filter size is a great combination.

Nikon's only come in 52 or 62mm sizes, in a few different strengths, but a few other manufacturers have larger sizes - Canon now has a 77mm "dually", the 500D, which sounds like it also gives very good results, but at a cost of $170 +.
 
Top