Lens?

[Scorpiоn]

Now that I have a proper camera, I've been thinking about getting a proper lens.  I think I'd really like to venture into insect photography, but I have almost no knowledge of lenses and such.  I've read a bit about extender tubes, macro etc. but was hoping to get a bit of firsthand advice about shopping decisions from you folks.

I found a dead fly, and I found maximum zoom to be insufficient.  And putting a magnifying glass over the barrel didn't help.

[Mictheslik]

Insect photos are aesy with a standard lens, as long as you can use macro. Just get as close as possible and zoom in to frame it right, the macro should focus it properly.

So if I were to give you some advice i would save up for a really good zoom lens and get into aircraft photography

Just experiment!

.mic

[Scorpiоn]

Perhaps I am not doing something correctly then.  Getting as close/clear as I can, I still cannot distinguish the head, thorax or abdomen, much less make out any detail such as eyes.

This is as good as it gets with my current equipment (F7Z).


As you can see, it doesn't fill up much of the available space.


PS: #1 cropped, no resize.  #2 resized.

[Mictheslik]

This shot was taken with macro using a compact digital with a fixed lens....no fancy equipment here.

Camera:        Nikon Coolpix L3
Exposure:       0.008 sec (10/1289)
Aperture:       f/5.3
Focal Length:       19.2 mm
ISO Speed:       50
Exposure Bias:       0/10 EV
Flash:       Flash did not fire
Maximum Lens Aperture:       48/10
Digital Zoom Ratio:       0/100
Focal Length In 35mm Film:       116
Digital Zoom Factor:       100/100



Not cropped at all!

.Mic

[gryshnak]

Wow you have some really ugly flies!  :o

Google is your friend at times like this.

A good place to start:
http://www.digicamhistory.com/Macros%20Article.html

Fascinating bug photography:
http://www.mplonsky.com/photo/article.htm

An overview of equipment:
http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/buy ... guideid=12

Ultra-cheap macro photography:
http://www.photocritic.org/2005/macro-p ... -a-budget/

[Tweek]

Here's an uncropped pic of one I think you've seen before:



That's with macro enabled, ISO 50, 1/250th, f/5.6. (Taken with a Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z5)

[gryshnak]

You don't always have to get in close.

[Mictheslik]

Gryshnak, you have to get close if you don't have a huge lens was my point!

.Mic

[Hagar]

This is as good as it gets with my current equipment (F7Z).

If you mean the Panasonic FZ7 I suggest you speak to Omag. He's posted some excellent results here. http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=photos;action=display;num=1155389166

It's not possible to change lenses but various accessories are available. http://www.pma-show.com/2006/digital_camera/panasonic_review/001_panasonic_lumix_dmc_fz7.html

[thebrelon]

here is a raw picture I took with a basic 5 megaP digital camera, pentas S55:



so, I'm not expert but if your camera has a macro mode, and it surely has, you don't have to invest money in a lens....

vince

[Scorpiоn]

Unfortunately all these shots (mine and others) are things I can see with plain vision.  What I'm looking to do is see things not clearly visible to the naked eye, such as individual facets of the compound eye and spiracles.

Such as in the following link.
http://www.photography-blog.com/wp-content/g3-2s.jpg

Even though I do not posess a strong command over shutter speed/ISO/aperature manipulation (and harmonious operation), I still doubt this is possible with simply macro mode.

[Hagar]

If you want to take this up seriously I think you need a SLR/DSLR camera with a proper macro lens. However, it should be possible to get reasonable results with a point & shoot camera. If you do a search there are many online articles dedicated to this fascinating subject. Here's just one example. http://www.beautifulbugs.com/beautifulbugs/howto.htm
[quote]EQUIPMENT CHECK

If you want to go beyond typical close-up insect photography with your SLR, you

[Mictheslik]

That photo does use macro, but you will have to buy a longer lens.

.Mic

[Hagar]

Basics of photomacrography

[quote]Micro and macro are closely related. Photomicrography requires a microscope and camera while photomacrography requires a camera and special lenses and/or special attachments. When objects or specimens are too large for the compound microscope, we then must use either a low-power stereo microscope or a magnifying lens.

Photomacrography is usually defined as any magnification at the film plane of 1X (life size) and higher. Anything below life size is considered a

[Scorpiоn]

Whoops.  Forgot about this thread.

Hagar, I had considered DSLRs briefly, but I'm not even remotely advanced when it comes to photography, and plus for the price of one SLR/DSLR (800+ USD) I could buy a digital camera (Z740 under 300 USD) plus a lens, maybe two.  I don't think I'm advanced enough to commit those sort of funds.  I suppose this would be transitionary.  If I really get somewhere with "intermediate equipment, I suppose later on I would commit to a full fledged DSLR.

I bought the Z740 with the knowledge I could expand upon it's abilities with a lens later on.  It's just that there are so many options I'm trying to find out what I should pursue.  Extension tubes, lens, rails.  Wikipedia, Google and the like can only help so much, I was seeing what kind of experience y'all had here.