Affordable Macro lens advice?

[Gaz]

Photographing insects, I found impossible on a wide focal length macro. They buzz off to quickly, unless you pin them down first . Any you’ll never get close.

I tried dragonflies this week and got about 1m away at best. Next time, I’ll use the Sony 135mm GM with subject tracking on, and maybe I can get one in flight from 2 or 3m. The 90mm macro lens doesn’t focus quick enough for that.

Dragonfly from 3m…

• ILCE-7M4
• 90.0 mm
• ƒ/3.2
• 1/800 sec
• ISO 125

Snails were easy subjects though!

• ILCE-7M4
• FE 90mm F2.8 Macro G OSS
• 90.0 mm
• ƒ/2.8
• 55924/44739201 sec
• ISO 125

Gaz

 

[Brownie]

Thank you, that was helpful and I feel a bit sheepish to know I was comparing specs I didn't fully understand.

What Alpha is referring to is magnification from focus distance. It isn't going to change regardless of the sensor, which results in the same size subject. But there's something else to consider. Any lens is still going to result in a cropped image on that sensor, even though the magnification doesn't change. The result is less area around the subject. As an example, a 1:1 image on the FF sensor will leave space around a subject of a given size, where the top and bottom might be cut off on a crop sensor. Of course you can move back and get the entire subject, but then you lose the 1:1 magnification. This isn't a huge issue in practice, just something to be aware of. And of course a 60mm will still give 90mm FF FOV equivalence when you're not shooting macro.

The best focal length really depends on the intended use. I used an Olympus 30mm on my M-4/3. It had a 1.25:1 ratio, so the subject ended up 'larger than life'. It was perfect for scanning negatives to digital because of the close working distance and magnification. But what made it good for that made it not so great for close focusing insects.

 

[iamdlewis]

Thank you, that was helpful and I feel a bit sheepish to know I was comparing specs I didn't fully understand.

In addition to what Tim said you will want to understand the depth of field difference between the focal lengths because it can make a big difference depending on the type of macro you want to do. If you are going to be setting up stuff indoors the wider lens might make more sense because it will give you more depth of field at the same aperture.

I checked there is no DoF calculator here so: https://www.photopills.com/calculators/dof

 

[Clix Pix]

Years ago my first exposure to Sony digital photography was some ago now, the wonderful NEX 7. One of the lenses which I bought to use with that camera was the 30mm macro lens. Accustomed to longer length macros with my Nikon gear, I had more than a bit of difficulty with the 30mm macro and we never really quite got along. It was requiring that I get too physically close with it, and even when shooting flowers rather than insects, I found that lens problematic at times. That said, I sometimes got nice results, but.... As mentioned above, too, having to get in so close with it also did cause issues with the light so that sometimes I was cutting off the light source which was needed, not a good thing. I found that when I wanted to shoot macro that I went back to my Nikon gear, which at that time I still had.

Either the 50mm macro (which actually is not the greatest macro lens, either, being rather slow and hunts a lot, but when it nails the image it really does) or the outstanding 90mm macro are better choices (in my opinion) than the 30mm macro.

 

[AlphaWorld]

What Alpha is referring to is magnification from focus distance. It isn't going to change regardless of the sensor, which results in the same size subject. But there's something else to consider. Any lens is still going to result in a cropped image on that sensor, even though the magnification doesn't change. The result is less area around the subject. As an example, a 1:1 image on the FF sensor will leave space around a subject of a given size, where the top and bottom might be cut off on a crop sensor. Of course you can move back and get the entire subject, but then you lose the 1:1 magnification. This isn't a huge issue in practice, just something to be aware of. And of course a 60mm will still give 90mm FF FOV equivalence when you're not shooting macro.

The best focal length really depends on the intended use. I used an Olympus 30mm on my M-4/3. It had a 1.25:1 ratio, so the subject ended up 'larger than life'. It was perfect for scanning negatives to digital because of the close working distance and magnification. But what made it good for that made it not so great for close focusing insects.

A good reason to prefer a longer focal length for macro work is the “working distance“ - how close you have to be to the subject to achieve 1:1 macro. The longer the focal length, the longer the working distance. If you are photographing, for example, stamps, then it’s not an issue. If you are photographing dragonflies (at least, living ones not stuck on flypaper), it can make a huge difference.

A friend of mine has an old 200mm f/4 macro lens that he still uses to photograph bees and wasps. He really likes using it precisely because it means he is taking his photographs from further away

Do keep in mind that you are not obliged to use full 1:1 magnification - no one will point at your photo and say: “you only used 0.7:1 !!!”. You can shoot from further away and still get great images.

 

[Brownie]

A good reason to prefer a longer focal length for macro work is the “working distance“ - how close you have to be to the subject to achieve 1:1 macro. The longer the focal length, the longer the working distance. If you are photographing, for example, stamps, then it’s not an issue. If you are photographing dragonflies (at least, living ones not stuck on flypaper), it can make a huge difference.

A friend of mine has an old 200mm f/4 macro lens that he still uses to photograph bees and wasps. He really likes using it precisely because it means he is taking his photographs from further away

Do keep in mind that you are not obliged to use full 1:1 magnification - no one will point at your photo and say: “you only used 0.7:1 !!!”. You can shoot from further away and still get great images.

Pretty much what I said, isn't it?

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

You have all given me sound advice and I am reassessing my plans.