Beginner in extreme macro

clarnibass · Post by **clarnibass** » Mon Mar 04, 2019 9:15 am

Others seem to know better what the disadvantages of zoom lenses might be, but I guess it depends on the specific lens. The advantage that was mentioned is you can get lower magnification with the same objective, but how much also depends on the specific objective and lens.

It's been a while since I've used Canon, but from what I can (barely) remember, the 70-200mm f/4 IS was a pretty big improvement over the non-IS version, especially at 200mm, but the version II wasn't such a huge improvement over the first generation.

If you don't need the zoom, how about the Canon 200mm f/2.8? It's significantly cheaper and at least as good or better than the lenses you mentioned.
An alternative is an older 200mm lens with an adapter. It's pretty easy to fit most lenses to a Canon mount. I use an old Nikon 200mm f/4 and it's excellent.

You basically have three options for lights. Continuous, camera flash (speed lights) and strobes.
Advantage of continuous is usually you can see what it looks like before taking the photo. Main disadvantage is probably slow shutter speeds.
Camera flashes advantages are very fast flash (unless you are close to max power), so any vibrations and tiny movements usually don't matter. Small and portable. Disadvantages are you don't have any light except the flash itself, so sometimes hard to focus (depends on available light, might need to use a flashlight, etc.) and (for me) messing with batteries (I guess some continuous might use batteries too).
Strobes are similar to flashes, but the flash speed varies a lot between models, but they generally stronger so you can often use minimum power. AC powered so no batteries (there are battery strobes too). Bigger, take more space, usually require even larger stands, etc.

The tilting screen can be really nice. Sometimes it's tricky to light the subject to focus with one hand while looking at back. Also if your setup is high (in relation to yourself) or low, etc.
It's not critical or a deal breaker, just a nice feature to have.

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:53 am

I think for photographing fungi in the field, a tilting screen is a major advantage, as is wifi control for stacking.
If you're using flash I can't think of a reason why one camera would be significantly better than another. The vibration issue is moot.

VinodkumarSelvaraj · Post by **VinodkumarSelvaraj** » Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:38 am

ChrisR wrote:I think for photographing fungi in the field, a tilting screen is a major advantage, as is wifi control for stacking.
If you're using flash I can't think of a reason why one camera would be significantly better than another. The vibration issue is moot.

Thank you Chris.

VinodkumarSelvaraj · Post by **VinodkumarSelvaraj** » Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:42 pm

clarnibass wrote:Others seem to know better what the disadvantages of zoom lenses might be, but I guess it depends on the specific lens. The advantage that was mentioned is you can get lower magnification with the same objective, but how much also depends on the specific objective and lens.

It's been a while since I've used Canon, but from what I can (barely) remember, the 70-200mm f/4 IS was a pretty big improvement over the non-IS version, especially at 200mm, but the version II wasn't such a huge improvement over the first generation.

If you don't need the zoom, how about the Canon 200mm f/2.8? It's significantly cheaper and at least as good or better than the lenses you mentioned.
An alternative is an older 200mm lens with an adapter. It's pretty easy to fit most lenses to a Canon mount. I use an old Nikon 200mm f/4 and it's excellent.

You basically have three options for lights. Continuous, camera flash (speed lights) and strobes.
Advantage of continuous is usually you can see what it looks like before taking the photo. Main disadvantage is probably slow shutter speeds.
Camera flashes advantages are very fast flash (unless you are close to max power), so any vibrations and tiny movements usually don't matter. Small and portable. Disadvantages are you don't have any light except the flash itself, so sometimes hard to focus (depends on available light, might need to use a flashlight, etc.) and (for me) messing with batteries (I guess some continuous might use batteries too).
Strobes are similar to flashes, but the flash speed varies a lot between models, but they generally stronger so you can often use minimum power. AC powered so no batteries (there are battery strobes too). Bigger, take more space, usually require even larger stands, etc.

The tilting screen can be really nice. Sometimes it's tricky to light the subject to focus with one hand while looking at back. Also if your setup is high (in relation to yourself) or low, etc.
It's not critical or a deal breaker, just a nice feature to have.

Thanks a lot Clarnibass. I shall go with the canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM. I also read that the prime lenses are sharper than zoom lenses. Thanks or your advice.

Pau · Post by **Pau** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 4:49 am

VinodkumarSelvaraj wrote:... I shall go with the canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM. I also read that the prime lenses are sharper than zoom lenses. Thanks or your advice.

Before making any expensive buy, best think in the whole setup you need and the budget at your disposal.

A modern water sealed IS L Canon zoom or tele es good to have if you do outdoors wildlife or sports photography -this is why I have it- but there are better suited and much less expensive options like the Raynox diopters on tubes. IS is not useful for extreme macro.

I'd put the money mainly in the main component: the objectives, and also in a good stacking rail and illumination setup.

Because, as you have stated, the image quality is your main concern, I would go for Mitutoyo M Plan Apo objectives. Then you can also buy Raynox 150 and 250 diopters and the adequate extension tubes and adapters (*) and a Wemacro or Stackshot rail

* for example wemacro.com sells most of this stuff at reasonable prices

VinodkumarSelvaraj · Post by **VinodkumarSelvaraj** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:51 am

Pau wrote:
VinodkumarSelvaraj wrote:... I shall go with the canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM. I also read that the prime lenses are sharper than zoom lenses. Thanks or your advice.
Before making any expensive buy, best think in the whole setup you need and the budget at your disposal.

A modern water sealed IS L Canon zoom or tele es good to have if you do outdoors wildlife or sports photography -this is why I have it- but there are better suited and much less expensive options like the Raynox diopters on tubes. IS is not useful for extreme macro.

I'd put the money mainly in the main component: the objectives, and also in a good stacking rail and illumination setup.

Because, as you have stated, the image quality is your main concern, I would go for Mitutoyo M Plan Apo objectives. Then you can also buy Raynox 150 and 250 diopters and the adequate extension tubes and adapters (*) and a Wemacro or Stackshot rail

* for example wemacro.com sells most of this stuff at reasonable prices

Thank you Pau. The total budget will be around 6000 CAD including camera. I already did some research on WeMacro website and noted things like rail, horizontal stand, fine adjustment platform, adapters etc. to buy.

Since I have seen lot of photos taken with objectives attached on tele lens, I thought the quality will be better with tele lens rather than raynox and I also thought the magnification can be modified. Eventhough I use the camera for field photography I donot think i need a telephoto for taking diseased plants that are closer to me. In my case if I am buying a tele then that is only for use in extreme macro. So if raynox is a cheap alternative for the same quality then I shall go for that for a fixed magnification.

Now as per your suggestion I shall spend the bigger part of money on objectives. So do you suggest me 50X Mitutoyo 0.55 WD 13? Where can I buy good glass for good money. I have already prepared an excel of things needed and some 2500 is left out (If I am buying raynox 250 instead of canon ef 200mm).

Also let me know how much should be the length of the extension tube if I am using a Mitutoyo on Raynox 250. I studied in WeMacro website, they performed test with three set of tubes ie 15cm in total. I can buy this complete set (tubes with raynox) from WeMacro if this suites.
Please suggest. Every time I wonder how people are so interested in helping and I need to thank them always

.

luxuspeter · Post by **luxuspeter** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:21 am

Hello VinodkumarSelvaraj,

you maybe want also to consider the difference between a DSLR vs mirrorless system-cameras. I learned that from a totally different field of photography: stop-motion-animation. There most forums recommends mirrorless because of their durability. If you make 100 photos for one stacked photo this divides the durability of a DSLR by 100. Each photo requires the mirror to rotate, which is a huge stress on mechanic parts. Now for example Canon gives you a guaranty of 80.000 photos ... divided by 100 means you will be able to make 800 full quality images until you reach this point.

(Mirrorless has full frame too)

I use my DSLRs now for my experiments, but my next camera will be a mirrorless.

Pau · Post by **Pau** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:07 am

Vinodkumar,
please ask at the forum about the right distance and setup, there are lots of posts about but now I can't find a full adequate one to answer your requests and to recommend one.
50X is pretty high magnification. Likely you would also be interested in the 20X and maybe also the 10X.

luxuspeter,
Often the shutter life is more important than the mirror. In principle cameras with full electronic shutter are preferable, although there are quite few of them in the market for now and they have their own limitations (flash working, sensor size, prize...)
In Canon line the APSC EOS-M mirrorless have an important -and absurd- limitation: they don't allow computer tethering like EOS DSLRs, a most useful feature in the studio
AFAIK the only APSC cameras with full electronic shutter for now are some Fuji and Sony models (although the info about them is not enough clear to me). Canon lenses can work very well with an adapter on the Sony.

take a look at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 046#244046

VinodkumarSelvaraj · Post by **VinodkumarSelvaraj** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:57 am

Thank you guys for all your knowledgeable input. I have made my mind for the purchase of the camera, lenses and other accessories, except for the objective.

One last request to help me.
I need more magnification for fungi that are relatively smaller than insects. So decided to stick to 50X objective (May be in future I can buy a 100mm tube lens if I need to reduce the magnification to 25x). As per your suggestions I am looking to buy either one of the objectives

1. Nikon CF Plan 50X 0.55 inf/- EPI ELWD as suggested by Rik
2. Mitutoyo as suggested by Pau
a. 50x 0.55 WD 13
b. 50x 0.42 WD 20.5
It seems Nikon is available only as used (Optotek, ebay) and Mitutoyo is available as new (Edmund optics). However, the price is too diverse. Could you please suggest where to buy any one of these (either used or new with good optical condition) with a reasonable price of near to 1500 to 2000 USD. Thanks in advance.

Pau · Post by **Pau** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:12 pm

If your budget fits go for the Mitutoyo 50/0.55. 0.42 NA is too low for this magnification, even 0.55 is, although this is the penalty for having LWD.

The Nikon is a Plan Achromat while the Mitutoyo is a Plan Apochromat, much better correction of chromatic aberrations. Resolution will be the same, at least theoretically, as it mainly depends of NA

luxuspeter · Post by **luxuspeter** » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:03 am

Thanks Pau!!!

Pau wrote: luxuspeter,
Often the shutter life is more important than the mirror. In principle cameras with full electronic shutter are preferable, although there are quite few of them in the market for now and they have their own limitations (flash working, sensor size, prize...)
In Canon line the APSC EOS-M mirrorless have an important -and absurd- limitation: they don't allow computer tethering like EOS DSLRs, a most useful feature in the studio
AFAIK the only APSC cameras with full electronic shutter for now are some Fuji and Sony models (although the info about them is not enough clear to me). Canon lenses can work very well with an adapter on the Sony.

take a look at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 046#244046

The article mentioned in the post says:

If you are a product, macro, or high volume photographer the reduced vibrations and near unlimited shutter lifetime would be beneficial to you, but if you rely on freezing fast moving objects or use flash, it might be best to stick to mechanical shutters – at least for the near future.

And another problem mentioned is how the light is captured:

This is a problem for fast exposure times with electronic shutter and continuous illumination, which can result in banding. But the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... KF6nFzpHBU mentions that it can be counteracted with longer exposures. This is only a problem if you really need a very fast shutter speed. But thanks the information ... I need to dive deeper in the topic of rolling shutter.

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:04 am

VKS - I'd be +1 for using Raynox (both FLs, 208mm and 125mm) as "tube" lenses. They're cheap well documented and almost as good as anything else.

I'm not familiar with details of mirrorless cameras but they make a lot of sense. The Sony A6300 for example is used by several on the forum.

Mitutoyo objectives are very nice but a pain in the backside.
Buying used, you HAVE to be able to test whether they're working properly or not.
Rik had a 10x, which was OK, then at some point its performance made him check against an earlier image he'd made with it. By that comparison it had clearly "gone off". Without the comparison, he may have been less certain.

I have a Mitutoyo 10x NA 0.28, which I thought was OK, but it's not quite as sharp as the Nikon 10x NA 0.3 which I'd previously used. I thought maybe it was the tiny difference in NA. Later I bought a Nikon 10x NA 0.25, to find that it split the 0.28 and the 0.3 in terms of sharpness. SO that Mitutoyo was "off".
Then I bought another Mitutoyo, and it was worse so it went back.
Then I bought yet another Mitutoyo, and it was worse so it went back.

Then due to circumstances, I bought three more. All were different, but all "OK". I wonder how long before one of them "goes bad".

At higher magnification the situation isn't better, I'm afraid.

At 50x there are a few other objectives, some finites, none ideal. Some will be designated "LWD", which you may find is rather shorter than you would like. You need "metallurgical" objectives unless your spores will be under a cover slip. A WD of very few mm is less mad at 50x than at 10x, but not much!
Some of those objectives may get you into higher magnification photography at a lower price-point while you're waiting for the time/hassle it takes to get what you really want.

A couple of finite options
Nikon 40x Mplan 210. These come in "normal" and BD versions. You can remove the outer shell of the BD versions to give you a very small front element which is comparatively easy to get light around so you can more easily use a very short WD.
The LWD / ELWD versions have (in some cases) lower NAs, and tend to have more longitudinal CA - which may not bother you anyway.
An example is the 60x NA 0.70,ELWD, WD is several mm and OK.

There's a sheet here somewhere...

clarnibass · Post by **clarnibass** » Wed Mar 06, 2019 10:39 am

You mention a x50 objective, but first post you also mentioned the Canon MPE and extension tubes. Are you sure you want/need a x50 objective? Did you check what magnification you need? Maybe you need several?

You can see new prices of some Mitutoyo objectives here https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/Mitutoyo ... ves/12298/
See the huge difference between x5/x10 and (for example) x50.

I got a Mitutoyo objective from Lightglass Optics. I think they have some old stocks of never used objectives. Mine was never used before, but it wasn't new like when you order from a Mitutoyo dealer. I got it from Lightglass because it was about 2/3 the price and the local dealer said it was two to three months wait.
Mine seems excellent, but I don't have any others to compare it with.

I don't think it's that critical if you use a Raynox, Sigma LSA, a good 200mm lens, or any good alternative.
I got a 200mm lens because it was the simplest option and results seem very good.

ChrisRaper · Post by **ChrisRaper** » Sun Mar 10, 2019 12:53 am

I have no experience with mirrorless cameras but I'd dearly love a camera shutter that didn't die after 10 months and take the sensor with it! We get through so many camera bodies at the NHM that they have to be considered "consumables", which is ridiculous.

Just my 2c, but at the NHM Dawn Painter has been producing some really excellent images of sub-1mm insects using the Mitutoyo 10x and 5x LWD Plan APO lenses on a 75-300mm Canon zoom lens. It vignettes a little at the far end but it's a very usable even then and the ability to dial in a magnification without changing anything else is really useful. I'll try to get her to post some images

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Sun Mar 10, 2019 2:37 am

The body I saw them using at the Natural History Museum was a Canon 5DSR, so it's an expensive consumable! Maybe they'd be better with a Sony A7R2 or A7R3, which could use their MPE-65 with an adapter?

Beginner in extreme macro

DSLR vs mirrorless system-cameras

Microscope objective