Budget macro options for interchangeable lens camera owners

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
I was considering the smaller subjects that are relevant to your original post and the other people here, where it wasn’t obvious. Obvious to ourselves, but misleading to many who you were writing for. But, at least, you’ve agreed with my post, though rather sarcastically.

I don't know what you are on about. If you are talking about the smaller subjects, then it is absolutely as stated. A 1:1 macro lens fills the sensor with the subject at the closest focusing distance. It's a widely used definition...

Macro photography
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
Budget as in money, but not time. I’m guessing you shoot mainly RAW format and use Photoshop, both major learning curves. Your daylight balanced tubes (gels?) need colour theory and possible correction with software. Don’t get shirty. 😐

Don't be a smartarse!
 

Banksie

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2020
Messages
870
Location
Salisbury
Don't be a smartarse!
There are many members here. That means there’s bound to be some with knowledge equal to, or greater than your own. I thought I was helping you. There’s no shame in that. I’ll leave you to it then.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
There are many members here. That means there’s bound to be some with knowledge equal to, or greater than your own.

There is no doubt about that, but you have presented a strawman argument.

I thought I was helping you.

Like I said, it was a thread more than 2 years old and I tried to explain the reasons for it. You had the chance to acknowledge that and back-off, but decided instead to be a smartarse about it.

I'll leave it to you... :rolleyes:
 

Banksie

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2020
Messages
870
Location
Salisbury
There is no doubt about that, but you have presented a strawman argument.



Like I said, it was a thread more than 2 years old and I tried to explain the reasons for it. You had the chance to acknowledge that and back-off, but decided instead to be a smartarse about it.

I'll leave it to you... :rolleyes:
You’ve really taken this badly. That’s a pity for the rest of your readers. As I said, there’s no shame in being wrong once in a while. We all do it.
 

W.Andy

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
19
Location
France
it's a very nice read. The way I understand 1:1 magnification ration is pretty simple, 1:1 means a 1cm object can be made exactly the same size onto the sensor. 1:2 means the 1cm object will only be 0.5cm on the sensor. (I am not a native English speaker, pardon me if I don't make myself clear)
I ,however, found this number getting less and less important with the improving on pixels and ISO performance. So my standard these days usually set at 0.25x for full frame. (sadly there ain't many who can meet the standard)
PS: of course there is a limit to cropping your pic, at same point one might as well just take the photo with their phone instead.

And man I wish I had read this back a few years back before buying the close up filter, the filter is fine for taking picture of still objects like flies, but in term of composition it really doesn't have much flexibility as it could only focus at very limited range.
As my go to camera being a mirrorless now, I just bought adopters and used old lenses. (I had minolta 50/2.8 and tokina 90/2.5 before I finally settle down with zeiss 50/2)
And life since has became much easier!

Here is a pic I took with close up filter on FE 55/1.8.
Just joined the forum today, quite thrilling to find out there is sub forum talking about photography!

DSC07934-2.jpg
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
The way I understand 1:1 magnification ration is pretty simple, 1:1 means a 1cm object can be made exactly the same size onto the sensor.

Well, it would need the sensor to be 1 cm as well. 1:1 means that whatever size the sensor is, you can fill it with the subject at the minimum focusing distance.

Col
 

W.Andy

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
19
Location
France
Well, it would need the sensor to be 1 cm as well. 1:1 means that whatever size the sensor is, you can fill it with the subject at the minimum focusing distance.

Col
hmmm, I am not so sure if I understand about the definition you gave, by filling you meant make the sensor all full?
 

W.Andy

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
19
Location
France
A quote from Dpreview:
"What happens if the subject is the same size in real life as its projection? If we shoot a 1cm fly and its projection on the sensor measures 1cm as well, the magnification is 1:1. The 1:1 ratio has an important meaning for macro enthusiasts. Technically speaking, macro photography means shooting at a magnification ratio of at least 1:1. Therefore, a 'true' macro lens has the ability to produce a magnification ratio of 1:1, or higher."

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6...raphy means,approximately a 1:1 magnification.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
A quote from Dpreview:
"What happens if the subject is the same size in real life as its projection? If we shoot a 1cm fly and its projection on the sensor measures 1cm as well, the magnification is 1:1. The 1:1 ratio has an important meaning for macro enthusiasts. Technically speaking, macro photography means shooting at a magnification ratio of at least 1:1. Therefore, a 'true' macro lens has the ability to produce a magnification ratio of 1:1, or higher."

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6519974919/macro-photography-understanding-magnification#:~:text=Technically speaking, macro photography means,approximately a 1:1 magnification.

Ah, OK, well, that is not quite the same as what you initially said. :)

If you look at it this way...

If your sensor is 36 x 24 mm in size, and at the closest focusing distance you can just focus on a postage stamp with dimensions of 36 x 24 mm, then you have 1:1 magnification.

Macro is a bit of a general term, though. You see lenses quoted as 'macro' when they provide less than 1:1 magnification. And of course sensors with a 'crop factor' give you better than 1:1 magnification with a lens classed as 1:1, as that figure is based on a 'full frame' sensor.

Col
 

W.Andy

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
19
Location
France
Ah, OK, well, that is not quite the same as what you initially said. :)

If you look at it this way...

If your sensor is 36 x 24 mm in size, and at the closest focusing distance you can just focus on a postage stamp with dimensions of 36 x 24 mm, then you have 1:1 magnification.

Macro is a bit of a general term, though. You see lenses quoted as 'macro' when they provide less than 1:1 magnification. And of course sensors with a 'crop factor' give you better than 1:1 magnification with a lens classed as 1:1, as that figure is based on a 'full frame' sensor.

Col
Well, that was exactly what I meant but anyway...
I don't consider the crop factor has anything to do with magnification ration, 1:1 basically means the lenses is capable of making the reflection on the sensor the same size as the really thing is. Sensor size just doesn't play any factor here. (the same was also mentioned in the dpreview article)
And the fact that brand like olympus using the term "full frame equivalent" actually confused me a lot.
 

4wings

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
1,019
Location
Bristol
The DCR 150 or DCR 250 Raynox multi element unit screws to the front of most lenses with a supplied adapter and gives amazingly sharp results and for £50-£70 is well worth the money.
The DCR 150 gives an easier to handle magnification than the more powerful DCR 250.
I also use a Sigma 105 macro lens and an assortment of reversed lenses from 28mm to 50mm as well as Nikon Micro-Nikkor, bellows etc.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
Well, that was exactly what I meant but anyway...
I don't consider the crop factor has anything to do with magnification ration, 1:1 basically means the lenses is capable of making the reflection on the sensor the same size as the really thing is. Sensor size just doesn't play any factor here. (the same was also mentioned in the dpreview article)
And the fact that brand like olympus using the term "full frame equivalent" actually confused me a lot.

It's the sensor that is capturing the image, so it's as much the sensor that dictates the size of the image, compared to the subject. A lens that gives you 1:1 on a full frame sensor and gives you 1.5:1 on a crop sensor means that the magnification you get on your crop sensor at closest focusing distance is 1.5:1, not 1:1.

It's partly semantics, and as such I am not much bothered by the terminology. If you know what you've got, you know what you've got... ;)
 

W.Andy

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
19
Location
France
It's the sensor that is capturing the image, so it's as much the sensor that dictates the size of the image, compared to the subject. A lens that gives you 1:1 on a full frame sensor and gives you 1.5:1 on a crop sensor means that the magnification you get on your crop sensor at closest focusing distance is 1.5:1, not 1:1.

It's partly semantics, and as such I am not much bothered by the terminology. If you know what you've got, you know what you've got... ;)
yes I guess.
Sorry though, I tried but the fact that you consider sensor size has to do with the magnification factor really doesn't get through my brain. :/
But as long as you know what you are getting out of those lenses you are buying, I guess no harm can be done.
Have a good one :p
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
28,773
Location
Embra
Sorry though, I tried but the fact that you consider sensor size has to do with the magnification factor really doesn't get through my brain...

But you are referring to sensor size as well...
... 1:1 means a 1cm object can be made exactly the same size onto the sensor....

That statement automatically factors-in the size of the sensor. If the sensor you are referring to is suddenly twice the area, then the image will only fill half of it, and so the apparent magnification will be half of what it was originally.

Ultimately, it is all to do with the resolution and the number of pixels. You can blow up any image to be a bigger magnification, but at the loss of resolution if you can't capture it onto a higher number of pixels initially.
 

W.Andy

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
19
Location
France
But you are referring to sensor size as well...


That statement automatically factors-in the size of the sensor. If the sensor you are referring to is suddenly twice the area, then the image will only fill half of it, and so the apparent magnification will be half of what it was originally.

Ultimately, it is all to do with the resolution and the number of pixels. You can blow up any image to be a bigger magnification, but at the loss of resolution if you can't capture it onto a higher number of pixels initially.
Man if you take pixel into consideration it can only get worse...
By saying "1:1 means a 1cm object can be made exactly the same size onto the sensor" I meant it created the same 1cm reflection (not sure how to call it properly) onto the sensor. It's the lenses that are able to pull this off, so now if you adopt it truthfully to your M4/3 or Apsc (depends on which brand could be 1*5 or 1*6), the lenses will still do the same 1:1 but only the aspect of picture changes because the sensor can only take certain part of it hence the name "cropped sensor".
What it doesn't do is to change the lenses' ability to reflect the true size of the object onto your sensor.
Make no mistake, it's the sensor which "cropped" the image to make it looks bigger.
That's also why I don't think it's a good ideal to take about pixels because with all the inbody stacking picture and such, one can already make a really small crop from their picture and can still be quite clean and detailed even though it is taken with a M43 sensor.
This is also why I mentioned I only need lenses with 0.25X for my fishing picture, with a camera of 40mega pixels it's not really an issue anymore to crop a bit and still getting the result.
 

Latest posts

Top