SLR for macro photography

[bplatt]

the best digital slr may not always be the best choice in macro photography. so, having read the sticky thread, i pose this question:

I love to take close-up macro shots of flowers and other such things. Currently, I have a Canon S50. It does surprisingly well, but sometimes it just doesn't cut the mustard with what I want, and the macro shot focusing takes a ton of life out of the batteries. I've been thinking of upgrading to an SLR with a macro lens. I have no other SLRs with lenses other than a Canon Rebel (not digital) with just a regular 50mm lens. So I'm starting relatively fresh.

Can anyone suggest a good digital SLR/lenses that would work for my macro shots? Thanks!

[Sebastian]

A Drebel with an extension tube will let you focus closer with that 50, or better yet, get a lens reversal ring for the same lens and you'll get even better magnification.

I don't understand your statement though, digital SLRs make great macro setups due to the fact that they usually have a crop factor, meaning you get greater apparent magnification than you would on a comparable 35mm body using the same lens.

[bplatt]

A Drebel with an extension tube will let you focus closer with that 50, or better yet, get a lens reversal ring for the same lens and you'll get even better magnification.

I don't understand your statement though, digital SLRs make great macro setups due to the fact that they usually have a crop factor, meaning you get greater apparent magnification than you would on a comparable 35mm body using the same lens.

my only question was which digital camera would someone choose if they wanted to take primarily macro shots. canon? nikon? other?

the only reason i mentioned the NON-digital SLR was if someone said "well if you have any other lenses of a certain brand sitting around, get that camera." yes, i do have one canon lens sitting around.

[Sebastian]

Your first sentence reads:

"the best digital slr may not always be the best choice in macro photography."

That's why I was confused.

macro photography is no different from any other photography, and therefore no certain model/brand will outperform any other. You need to decide what fits you based on how you shoot, the ergonomics you prefer, and what is important to you in the system as a whole.

You already have a Canon lens, and a damn good one at that, so the logical step is to go with that. But, since the Rebel and the 50mm are not that much of an investment, you also would not be losing anything by switching to another system.

[another view]

Macro photography really has more to do with the lens and system accessories than the camera body. Any DSLR should do just as well as another here. You'll probably shoot completely manual or at least manual focus for the control. I don't think that there are any DSLR's out there that can't do this.

Dedicated macro lenses can get expensive, and extension tubes and/or reversing rings - as well as close-up diopters - are a less expensive way to get started. If you really get into it, there are ring flashes that attach to the front of the lens for even lighting. Nikon or Canon will have all of these options available, but not sure if the others do. I'd stick with one of those two.

Can't make a specific lens recommendation due to not having a lot of experience with these. I have shot with Nikon's 105 Micro (they've always called them "micro" instead of macro for some reason) and was very impressed. Most macro lenses out there should be very, very sharp including some of the ones from 3rd party manufacturers like Tokina.

The longer the focal length the greater working distance (distance between subject and camera) you'll have. This may or may not be a big deal, but with a 60mm you might have to get so close that you block your own lighting. I remember a Nikon rep saying how happy someone was when they came out with a 200mm Micro lens - he photographed rattlesnakes and really could use the longer working distance!

[kafin8ed]

Seb, he could be refering to the fact that p&s cams with APS sized sensors have deeper DOF than an SLR with a larger sensor and the same lens. The best example of this being how it's difficult to nicely blur the BG with a P&S. That said, I still think the statement is wrong, it will cost you more $$$ with an SLR though, that is certainly true.

He should try a D Rebel and one of the new Sigma 50mm or 105mm macro lenses maybe if he doesn't want to experiment with extension tube and such...

[ustein]

>Macro photography really has more to do with the lens and system accessories than the camera body.

Very true and the big two Canon/Nikon come with the largest selection.

We actually use Servoe-AF for flower shots as flowers move in the wind. Also flash can get important.

Uwe