Macro advice please.

[kshotton45]

I'm going to try my hand at macro - nothing too serious! I've already ordered a book ( as recommended by eeyore). A few answers would be apprieciated and would get me going.
1. On a camera forum it has been suggested that the Canon 400D kit lens is an ideal starter lens. Is this true? I use mine as a paper weight so it would be nice to use it on the camera !
2. The kit lens plus extension tubes is even better still?
3. What is the difference between using spacer tubes and useing a close up lens ( those that you screw into the filter thread.

That'll do to start ...............

Thanks Keith.

[WhiskyBottle]

Can't comment on the kit lens, but it's unlikely to give you more than 1/4 life size. That may be enough to start you off.
Both extention tubes & supplimentary close-up lenses limit the distance focus, probably to no more than 1/2 metre. This can be a disadvantage if you are trying to take shots as you approach.
The likes of the 100mm macro lenses will focus to infinity. They make good landscape lenses when you want details.

[David Hyde]

Hi
Again I can't comment on the kit lens. Extension tubes will give you greater magnification than close-up 'filter' lenses but you will loose light, which, without flash, will mean you may run into depth-of-field problems. The close-up 'filter' attachment will give you no loss of light.
Another word of caution here, I suspect Canon extension tubes are expensive but should maintain the electronic contacts to your camera. Most of the cheaper ones (particularly those advertised on ebay) have no contacts and can only be used with manual focus and manual exposure. That said there is no difference in the quality of result with these tubes as there are no lens elements in them.
Hope this helps.
David

[kshotton45]

O.K Thanks, I'm obviously in the the company of experts, so here's a quickie...........
What's the difference between getting up close to your subject , say 1Cm away; and standing 1 yard away with a long lens and zooming in. Are both methods Macro ?
I shan't be getting a special lens ( unless I get hooked ! ), but I have the kit lens, a 17-85 IS, an 80-200 and a 175-500. Which would be best for starting?

Thanks Keith.

[Paul mabbott]

Fitting auxillary lenses is always likely to give some loss of definition so extension rings are the best way to modify a standard lens. As noted, loss of light and thus depth of field is the main problem, especially when you get up to a full set of tubes! One way to alleviate this is by using a ring flash - if you can get one to fit your lens ....
Good luck.

Originally Posted by David Hyde

.......... Extension tubes will give you greater magnification than close-up 'filter' lenses but you will loose light, which, without flash, will mean you may run into depth-of-field problems. The close-up 'filter' attachment will give you no loss of light.
Another word of caution here, I suspect Canon extension tubes are expensive but should maintain the electronic contacts to your camera. Most of the cheaper ones (particularly those advertised on ebay) have no contacts and can only be used with manual focus and manual exposure. That said there is no difference in the quality of result with these tubes as there are no lens elements in them.
Hope this helps.
David

[WhiskyBottle]

Originally Posted by kshotton45

What's the difference between getting up close to your subject , say 1Cm away; and standing 1 yard away with a long lens and zooming in. Are both methods Macro ?
Thanks Keith.

It's easier from further away, less chance of spooking the subject. Also you wouldn't loss light due to casting your own shadow on the subject as you would at very close range.
A suplimentary close-up lens on either the 200 or 500 zoom would be a good starting point. Get a Canon or Nikon double element lens and you wont notice loss of quality, so long as the zoom is up to it. They ain't cheep though. You will need to think about how you're going to hold it still, particularlly the 500 zoom.

[Paul mabbott]

And as a sort of compromise ... you can use a small extension ring (x2 perhaps) on a small telephoto (150-250) which gives you something of the best of both worlds - I used to use this sort of thing, to good effect, for moths and odonates ...
If you want to photo smaller animals (5mm long or smaller) then you need a dedicated macro lens or extension rings, I feel ....

Originally Posted by WhiskyBottle

It's easier from further away, less chance of spooking the subject. Also you wouldn't loss light due to casting your own shadow on the subject as you would at very close range.
A suplimentary close-up lens on either the 200 or 500 zoom would be a good starting point. Get a Canon or Nikon double element lens and you wont notice loss of quality, so long as the zoom is up to it. They ain't cheep though. You will need to think about how you're going to hold it still, particularlly the 500 zoom.

[David Hyde]

Hi again, I thought I would chip in another £0.02 worth as macro photography has always interested me. In photography we associate MACRO with things small whereas, in fact, MACRO means large, MICRO means small.
MACRO photography is the production of an image to life size or LARGER. Therefore it does not matter what lens you use if you produce an image in the camera life size or larger then it is true macro photography. The term has adopted a different meaning over the years as, on most cameras and lenses, MACRO has become simply another word for CLOSE-UP.
Probably the above comes under the heading of useless information - interesting none the less.
David

[WestLothian]

Another option, that I have recently followed-up, is the traditional bellows with a lens reversing plate. This works best on a solid tripod and with extra flash lighting. This gives x4 true macro with a standard 50mm lens and up to x11 with a 20mm mounted reversed.

The working distances are slightly less than 2 inches so a cooperative subject is necessary, but it does let you completely fill the camera with a 2mm insect or plant part.

[Paul mabbott]

Lovely picture and a piece of masterly understatement about co-operative subjects! Best for fossils or dead insects.

Originally Posted by WestLothian

............The working distances are slightly less than 2 inches so a cooperative subject is necessary, but it does let you completely fill the camera with a 2mm insect or plant part.