looking for some advice

[Scott Buckel]

First, I have been amazed with all of the information and sharing on this forum. I have learned a lot this weekend reading many threads.

I have been photographing for a long time, mostly nature related subjects. Last year I started a project to document the life cycle of butterflies and moths. I found that I really liked seeing the early instars and the eggs. I did photograph a few last year with a reversed lens on my macro lens a 50mm f1.8 reversed on my 70-180 micro. To photograph some of the early instars last year I used all sorts of combinations of extension tubes (I have the Kenko ones) and diopters (I have Nikon 3T, 4T and Canon 500D). From this work last year it was obvious that I would want to use focus stacking.

I also have probably more flashes than almost anyone would ever need, including Nikon R1C1 flashes and two SB-900. I have other flashes that I used for high speed photos of hummingbirds as well. So my first bias is to use flash, but the continuous lighting looks interesting as well.

I have just purchased one of the Nikon Plan 10x 0.25 WD 10.5 infinity objectives this weekend off of eBay with a few adapter rings. This seemed to me after reading tons of threads this weekend to be a good step to get greater magnification.

I took a macro workshop last year, and I used a Stackshot. I plan on ordering one, but I am wondering if about which rail I should get, I am thinking about the longer one. Is there any downsides to purchasing the longer rail from Cognisys? I am also debating whether I want the basic controller or the 3D one.

Of course there is always the decision on which focus stacking software to buy, I know that I do not like using Photoshop as there have been to many artifacts to clean up. Is there a thorough comparison of Zerene and Helicon Focus some where as I have not been able to find one. The workshop I took last year used Helicon as he thought it was the best, and since then I have read about how good Zerene is. I did download an demo both last year and was able to use both, but I did not get much experience with either.

Other gear that I may use:

105 mm f2.8 micro
180 mm f3.5 Tamron (my only non-Nikon lens)
200 mm f4 AI micro
300 f4 (I have done lots of close ups with this lens using diopters and tubes)
pb 5 bellows

D300S
D7100
D800

I hope this is not too many questions, thanks in advance for your help,

Scott

[rjlittlefield]

Scott, welcome aboard!

At 10X, I definitely recommend to start with flash. Vibration is a big problem at higher magnifications, and flash will freeze that out. This is especially important because all of the Nikon bodies you've mentioned require a mechanical action to open the shutter at start of exposure. Using continuous illumination, the resulting shock is very likely to blur your image unless you use what I consider to be painfully long exposure times, so as to do most of the exposure after the shock dies out. In contrast, with a consumer grade flash dialed back to low power so as to give a nice short pulse, you can shoot even with first curtain flash at 1/200 second and still get crisp images. Continuous illumination provides more options for creative lighting, but it's not the best place to start.

For StackShot, mostly I use the short rail and the basic controller. The long rail can be an advantage in setups where the StackShot is the only means of adjusting camera position, but I think it's better to provide a separate mechanism for big adjustments anyway. For basic stacking, the main advantage of the X3 controller is that it has improved drive circuits that provide high precision movement control without the sometimes annoying whine from the stepper motor that the basic controller gives. Of course the X3 controller has a lot more capability, so if you think you might ever want to do any of what it does, that would be the way to go.

For stacking software, I'm an obviously biased adviser because I'm the fellow who wrote Zerene Stacker. That said, the only reason I went to so much trouble was because I wasn't happy with what I could buy at the time. Helicon Focus has improved a lot since I made that decision, but ZS is made specifically for the sort of work you want to do and by lots of measures it's the best tool for that job. One quick indicator is that in the last several years of Nikon Small World competition, more focus-stacked images have been generated using Zerene Stacker than all other packages combined. There are a lot of technical reasons for that, which I and others will be happy to discuss at your convenience. I'm not aware of a recent thorough comparison that you can just read.

--Rik

[Chris S.]

Howdy, Scott, and welcome to the forum!

You didn’t ask all that many questions, and Rik has answered them in ways that most of us here would agree with.

From the steps you’re taking, you seem to be on a solid, efficient track. Your new 10x objective will be in a league apart from any of the approaches you’ve used prior. Lots of us, myself included, have been in your shoes—experienced photographers of natural subjects, with a solid grounding in the use of macro lenses, diopters, and combinations of lenses to get greater magnification than 1x. You will likely find that the use of microscope objectives for magnifications of 5x and above is a huge step forward, when combined with an automated linear translation system such as StackShot, and focus stacking software such as Zerene Stacker. These elements, taken collectively, are a game-changer.

Most of us in this community use Zerene Stacker--not because of bias, but for superior workflow and results. Personally, I also much appreciate Zerene Stacker's retouching and scripting capabilities, plus the customer support that Rik provides. Cognisys (maker of StackShot) is also a small company that provides superb customer support. In becoming a customer of either Zerene Systems or Cognisys, one seems to acquire not just a solid product, but a valuable collaborator who will work with you, even if your needs are a bit out of the ordinary. I strongly recommend both.

I don’t keep close track of the various Nikon 10x infinite objectives—Rik has been the main pioneer and documenter of these optics, while most of my experience is with Mitutoyo infinites and Nikon finites. But if your objective is one that also works well at 5x, your 105mm f/2.8 micro should deliver a bit above 5x with it, while your 200mm f/4 micro and 180mm f/3.5 macro should deliver 10x and 9x, respectively—a nice set of magnifications for your lepidopteran subjects. If my experience is any guide, try stopping down your 200mm micro to just before it vignettes (f/5.6 - f/8 ) for best results when using it as a converging lens.

Question for you: How would you compare your Tamron 180 macro with your Nikkor 200mm micro? I intend to sell my 200mm micro Nikkor (I think my specimen ranks near the bottom of routine manufacturing variation, while my 105mm f/2.8 micro-Nikkor AF-D likely ranks near the top). So I’ve been wondering whether to replace it with another micro-Nikkor 200mm, or something else, such as the Tamron 180mm macro. Like you, I primarily use Nikon lenses for general work, but will make exceptions when there is a good reason.

Once again, welcome to our community!

--Chris

[Scott Buckel]

Thanks Rik and Chris for your help.

I'm traveling for work this week and thinking about photographing this weekend. Just before I left for the airport I found lots of caterpillars. I'll probably place order for my StackShot this week.

I do not have much experience using the Tamron 180, as I just picked it from one of my students that decided that she liked Canon better than Nikon, I picked up the D7100 with it as well. As I use the 180, I will post my observations. Most of them macro I have. Done in the past year or so has been with the 70-180 micro, as my brother had used my 105 and another friend was using the 200mm f4 ai lens for a time lapse project. Both of these lenses are returning home as the projects are done. I remember that both are excellent copies (I used these lenses in my film days).

I will likely start using the 70-180 micro zoom or the Tamron as they are currently at the house. I wish I would have found this forum last year as I probably would have figured out more details last year.

Once I get all of my pieces and parts together I will post more questions, as I am sure I will have more.

Thanks again for your help,

Scott

[Chris S.]

. . . another friend was using the 200mm f4 ai lens

Scott, I should have caught in your original post that your micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4 is the AI version. Mine is the AF-D IF-ED, which of course has a different optical design.

I used these lenses in my film days.

I suspect you have a lot of company in this, among Nikon users. Some of my lenses, I purchased in the early 1980's--and most of these were second-hand even then. Nikon is far from perfect, but their policy of keeping newer bodies compatible with old lenses is a wonderful thing.

I will likely start using the 70-180 micro zoom or the Tamron as they are currently at the house.

As you've probably read here, all zoom lenses thus far tested vignette if zoomed very far from their long ends. So I'd expect your 70-180 micro-Nikkor zoom to exhibit this behavior. Should you happen to discover otherwise, please report it.

I wish I would have found this forum last year as I probably would have figured out more details last year.

If you have any thoughts on how we can help photographers like you find us more easily, please PM me. I hope that whoever led the macro workshop you attended knew about this forum?

Once I get all of my pieces and parts together I will post more questions, as I am sure I will have more.

Ask away!

Cheers,

--Chris