Question to micro-nikkor owners

Discussion in 'Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery' started by Gilles, Jun 10, 2005.

  1. Photo taken with 5700 on macro this morning at the max magnification. My question is with the micro lens available for Dslr would it be possible to take a higher magnification so as to take only the center and maybe a little bit of the surrounding color?

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Dirtyharry71

    Dirtyharry71 Guest

    this was taken with the 105 2.8
    and I couldn't go as close as this with my 5700

    It's a moth btw

    picture.
     
  3. In my photo the flower was inside the lenshood, with your photo did you use your lens without any thing add to it to increase the magnification?
     
  4. Jerry Snider

    Jerry Snider

    390
    May 8, 2005
    Gilles,
    Were you unable to use the 105 for the top photo for a comparison? From what I see here the bottom photo with the 105 is of superior quality to the top photo--to my eyes there is absolutely no contest re sharpness. Without knowing the size of the flower in the top picture and the size of the moth (I suspect the moth was somewhat smaller?) it is hard to provide you with an accurate recommendation. Is a magnification ratiio provided In the 5700 camera reference manual for the macro setting? You can obtain a 1:1 ratio with the 105, and perhaps even higher with extension rings attached. Have you considered using an identical subject for photos taken with both cameras set at the closest focusing distance and compare pics? If possible, this may provide you with the answers you are seeking.
    I do hope that folks with far more experience will jump in here to help you.
    Jerry Snider

    Oops!! it appears that you didn't take the 2nd photo. Do you have access to a camera with a 105 macro mounted on it to conduct the test?
     
  5. Jerry I don't have a Dslr but i am thinking of buying one. I do have a 55 and 105 micro lens that i bought in the 70's to use with my F2 and as far as i can remember the lenses had to be very very close to the subject to have a high magnification. I am looking maybe more of the 200 for my needs.
     
  6. It depends on how big the final crop you want it to be. The 5400 can get pretty close, around 2 inches away. But the main difference with a 105mm micro is that you get that extra working distance and better lighting without the camera itself getting in the way.

    The following is almost a 100% crop shot with the 105mm micro, the flower is about 2 inches in diameter.

    [​IMG]

    Focal length : 105.0mm (35mm equivalent: 157mm)
    Exposure time : 0.0063 s (1/160)
    Aperture : f/13.0
    Flash used : Yes
    Metering Mode: center weight

    Regards,
    Jonathan
     
  7. Jerry Snider

    Jerry Snider

    390
    May 8, 2005
    Gilles,
    I note from the 5700 manual that it only says that the macro will work as close as 3 cm--I find no reference to ratios provided. Perhaps I have overlooked it. If you photograph a ruler with your 5700 at the closest focusing range and have your friend who took the moth pic to do the same with the 105 you will at least have an approximate answer. Of course, there are numerous other elements at work here as well. While the 5700 is an excellent camera, the sensor likely doesn't compare with that of a quality SLR digital, among other things.
    If you want, I can photograph a common object with my D70 and 105 that would be available to you as well (can't use my D2X as it is suffering from soft image difficulties) for you to compare. Again, a ruler would work nicely, but we have to agree whether it is metric or inches!!
    Jerry Snider

    Would also be happy to do the same with my 200 macro as well. Can even measure the distance of the lens to the subject for you if you think this will help.
    However, I can assure you that the results from an SLR with the any of your macros (perhaps they are not D lenses so will not be convenient to use on a digital SLR?). I love the 200 macro, however there ARE times when I can't get back far enough from the subject to focus, i.e. the working distance on occasion is TOO great!! This calls for the application of my 105 macro.
     
  8. Jonathan that is exactly that king of composition i would like for the flower. I went out to measure the flower, which is a petunia millions bells, it is 1 1/4 inch in diameter.
     
  9. Jerry I really would appreciate if you could take a kind of photo like Jonathan with your 105, and if you have a 200, that would be welcome too. I have found 2 picture on paper of my brother flys, they are not very good but i can put them here if you want to see them, they were made a few years ago.
     
  10. Jerry Snider

    Jerry Snider

    390
    May 8, 2005
    Will try to get to it sometime late this morning or this afternoon. Will use the 105 and the 200.
    Perhaps the fly pics should simply be sent to me privately. May be of little interest to the group as a whole.
    J. Snider
     
  11. Hi Gilles, here is a chart that shows the frame size for different magnifications and the dept of field, pretty well all the modern macro lenses will do 1:1, you can add teleconverters, extension tubes or diopters to get more magnification, for even more magnification you can use stacked lenses.

    [​IMG]

    Martin
     
  12. Tank you Martin, I made a copy of your chart.
     
  13. twig

    twig

    745
    May 23, 2005
    Gilles,
    I like the Sigma 150mm macro lens, because it allows for a little more distance from the subject (15" instead of 6-7")

    [​IMG]
     
  14. 200mm f4 micro

    Here is a shot trying to achieve 1:1 ratio while experimenting with the 200mm micro. Had plenty of working distance.
    [​IMG]
     
  15. twig

    twig

    745
    May 23, 2005
    Any plenty of spare pixels to crop too...

    damn you lucky D2X owners.
     
  16. Jerry Snider

    Jerry Snider

    390
    May 8, 2005
    Gilles,
    Here are two "ruler" shots using the 105 and 200 macros. Both shot at f32 and the details are on the photos. These are quick and dirty, but will give you something with which to compare.
    The top lines on the rule are in 1/16" increments. The bottom lines are in 1/32" increments.

    These are taken at 1:1 ratio and the working distance on the 200 was ca. 10" from subject to lens (not lens hood). The working distance on the 105 at 1:1 was ca. 5 1/4" from subject to lens. The 105 is an autofocus lens, but is not the newer D type.
    Hope this may be of some value to you.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    Yes, I had to reposition the tripod between lens changes, and the two pics aren't exactly identical, but are close.

    Jerry Snider
     
  17. Thank you very much Twig and Dave, Jerry in looking at the two pictures it is hard to find which one of the two gives the sharpest picture. As for the 200 micro, I looked on the Nikon Canada site and they don't talk about it.
     
  18. Jerry that is an excellent comparison.
     
  19. Jerry Snider

    Jerry Snider

    390
    May 8, 2005
    Dave, the pics were done quick and dirty, and I purposely shot long exposure times and stopped down. Hoped they help.

    Gilles, stating that you can't tell which is the sharpest lens I suspect is a GOOD thing. Both have been rated as quality lenses. However, in my own use, I find the 200 to be a bit sharper overall and especially at lower f stops (for macro work, that is). Also, if you look closely, the magnification is just slightly larger in the 200 than in the 105. The thing one likely has to consider is for what purpose are you going to use the lens? Do you NEED the extra working distance, for example. I like the extra distance for dragonflies, damselflies, pollinators of various sorts, and other bugs. If you really do a lot of 1:1 work, I would suggest that you read the info on the Really Right Stuff web site regarding macrophotography, comparing the 105 with the 200.
    Jerry Snider
     
  20. Isn't that weird, I noticed that last fall when I picked up my 200 f4 micro that its not listed on the Nikon Canada website, I thought maybe its getting discontinued but I haven't heard anything to suggest or confirm that.

    Martin
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Ring light question Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery Aug 14, 2014
Focus stacking questions Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery Apr 7, 2013
Lens for Macro Question Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery Jan 24, 2013
Bellows question Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery Jan 20, 2013
Question about macro "micro" Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery Mar 26, 2007