Yeah the weight factor in photography is a big thing. For a lot of people, myself included, it can make the difference as to whether you actually use the gear or not. Canon also have those 600mm and 800mm f11 lenses and they’re relatively light as well. Excellent reach on an aps-c body too. Probably the biggest draw back on those lenses is you’re fighting a lack of light and heat haze. The 100-400mm is much more versatile and practical for most people.
Do you know if your software may be better for denoising than camera raw?
Here’s a comparison. I assume you mean Adobe Camera Raw?
Original: a crop of the original as opened in Camera Raw no adjustments
Camera Raw: same cropping, the original with Noise Reduction applied (manually)
PureRaw 4: same cropping, using default settings applied to original
As for speed, once opened in Camera Raw, the RAW file noise slider is something you preview and that’s it. Ready for export. The PureRaw has a preview too, but this image took 5 seconds to complete the process (and export to a DNG).
Hope this helps. (Zoom in to 100% for comparison)
I have the 150 too and agree completely about the difference in field use. I was very lucky to find both the 150 and the 250 at our local thrift shop for 30 dollars each. The great thing about clip-ons and also manual lenses? They age very well.
You can try one of the Nikon point and shoots… you will get a built in macro mode and excellent zooming range, since you mentioned bird photography! P110 is the latest model, and its pretty good with really good zoom and nice features! Sorry in case someone has already posted this suggestion, I didn’t see it!
Hi all! Due to some issues with my camera recently https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/what-are-your-most-frustrating-inatting-moments/70742/148, I’m afraid I will have to buy a new camera very soon. I think I will go with the Nikon. From some Nikon users, what are some tips for buying one? I’ve never owned one, and I don’t know if there are different models or different types that fit different lens and stuff like that. Thanks for helping me through this!
For orientation on this question, there are lots of camera websites that provide detailled comparison of camera models and their different features.
If you are looking for an interchangeable lens camera, the body is probably less important than the lens you put on it (but do consider aspects such as ergonomics, placement of viewfinder, whether there are particular features like in-body image stabilization or editing/processing that you want).
Lens compatibility is largely determined by the camera mount – the interface with which the lens is attached to the body: https://fstoppers.com/gear/everything-youll-ever-need-know-about-nikon-lens-mounts-and-compatibility-722616 (random link, found with a quick internet search). Lenses are also designed for a particular sensor size (micro 4/3, APS-C, full frame); some camera makers use the same mount for cameras with different sensor sizes. If this is the case, lenses will be designated with the sensor size for which they are designed. You can use lenses designed for a larger sensor on a smaller one, though they are likely to be larger/heavier.
You might also find out whether the problem with your current camera is something that can be repaired fairly easily before you purchase a new one.
I believe that the reason my camera was dying was simply the battery no longer being effective; it is very old. However, even if I got a new battery, my camera is still missing an On/Off switch, so I have to keep taking the battery in and out each time I want to take a photo, which has been terrible for my battery. Not to mention that the whole camera is just getting slow and not working properly; sometimes it randomly starts taking a video in the middle of a photography session, and won’t let me stop! I have to remove the battery and reinsert it.
It’s just old and well-used; it served me very well for the time that I had it, and I certainly used it a LOT.
Thanks for your suggestions!
So I’m at the point of buying myself a camera, and have run into some issues. I currently have a fixed-lens camera with 20-1200 mm zoom.
As you can see from my springtail obs, this isn’t enough for a lot.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?taxon_id=49470&user_id=mkanimallover&verifiable=any
Just wondering from the macro photographers, what mm zoom do you have, because all those itty-bitty springtails and insects you get to fill up the frame in perfect focus are something I would like to at least partially achieve.
It depends what you mean. When it comes to a fixed-lens cameras (i.e., bridge cameras), I have no experience. But if you’re referring to buying a lens for a camera, the mm, or focal length isn’t too relevant (though the more it has, you generally won’t have to get quite as close, at the cost of a more chunky lens). So for springtails, I use a Laowa lens that is 25mm, but the more relevant thing is the magnification. That lens is 2.5-5x, and for springtails I pretty much exclusively use the 5x. And actually for some springtails I prefer a little bit more magnification, so I’ll even stick a macro extension tube on it. Though it can take me several minutes to find something through the camera in some cases when using that…
The camera itself isn’t that important, but if you’re going to buy a new camera, there are some specialized for extreme macro photography that can perform automatic focus stacking directly in the camera. A good example is the OM System brand.
For the lens:
- What matters is the magnification. Magnification means how much larger the subject will appear on your sensor and is represented by this formula:
number : number (example: 1:1)
If the number on the left is greater than 1, your subject will appear the same size or larger than it does in real life (1:1, 2:1, 5:1, 10:1). If you’re looking for a lens and it says it has a magnification of 5:1, it means that your subject will appear 5 times larger than it actually is on the sensor. It’s also common to say: 5x, 2x, 1x instead of using the “:”
-
My lens has a minimum focal length of 100mm and its magnification is only 1:4. As you can see, magnification and focal length are not related.
-
I’ve seen reviews of OM system lenses and they are excellent. I should mention that I’ve never used one and I’m only basing this on reviews, but if you look up reviews of OM system lenses, you’ll see that the photos, at least for me, are remarkable.
But I also think the brand doesn’t matter much; any lens with 1:1 magnification will probably be excellent. But I would recommend OM System.
And finally, I’ll give a recommendation for a flash: I recently bought the Godox V480 flash. What I enjoy most about this flash is that it has a built-in flashlight to help illuminate the subject in dark places. It’s an excellent tool for macro photography, and a diffuser is also necessary. You can make a homemade one like the one I made.
A little late of a reply, but I got my new camera!
It is a Nikon D7500! My lens is a Nikon AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED. It’s worked great for largish insects, but tiny springtails are tricky because my F-stop is just not high enough, and even though it seems like I can’t zoom as far on springtails as with my old camera’s macro setting, the quality does seem higher. It’s also tricky because I can’t get very close (I often prop my old camera down right in front of the springtail, it has even sometimes focused relatively well on an insect crawling directly on the lens!
I paid less than $1400 for everything though (the lens was slightly used) so I think it was a good purchase!
It’s amazing for larger arthropods (like these gorgeous Condylostylus flies)
And here’s what my springtails are looking like 
I bought a Raynox to try to get some better details with springtails, but they move so much! I tried it with an anxious little beetle, but all I got were blurry beetle butt photos. I guess I had better practice on some more Condylostylus.
Thanks all for your help!!
To get better photos, perhaps it’s just a matter of tweaking the settings, the depth of field, there are thousands of things that can improve your photos. The same thing happened to me, my first photos was bad even if my photography setup is “modern”, but it was because i was a novice with my new setup
Maybe you’ve already tried that. But have you tried increasing the depth of field to a higher number?
Don’t get discouraged, the photos look good, but perhaps your camera needs some adjustments. Check the menus, check everything just in case.
As a tip, look for insects that you’re sure won’t move, even if you bother them, will be easier to take photos
Congratulations on your new camera! If you have any budget left over, it may be worth investigating some extension tubes. These should differ from the Raynox in that they don’t fit on the end of the lens and they don’t have any glass. They sit between your existing lens and the camera body effectively changing the focal length so that you can get the lens closer to the subject. There’s no glass to alter the quality of the light and there are no focus controls to get in the way. If you buy a set, you can pick the one you like best or stack them up to increase the effect. I have a Canon set up with a dedicated macro lens, but I still use the tubes to get images like this. As you can tell I am a big advocate of these tubes, though please rest assured that I am not on commission 
.
My other tip would be to forget about auto focus. Switch to manual, set the focusing ring away from the infinity position (closest position probably for springtails, though if you can get it near the centre you’re likely to maximise the optical capabilities of your lens). Focus on your subject by moving the whole camera/lens set-up to or away from the subject. If you’re not used to doing that, it can seem tricky at first but when you’re used to it, it’s by far the easiest way of doing things.
Good luck! Of
I tried to do some manual work, but couldn’t find any setting that was completely manual. I tried controlling the shutterspeed, but it couldn’t be more than 1/60 because then the photo seriously went black. I thought the camera was messed up already (thankfully I found that it was just way too dark. Needless to say, quite a few blurry photos later, I decided to go back to auto focus until I was more familiar with the camera.
$144+tax seems a little price-y for now; but the tube idea does seem good. What type of camera do you have?
I switch cameras too, it’s much faster 
I’m note sure what the F-stop has to do with being able to photograph springtails. Depth of field will always be fairly thin at high magnifications. There are various ways to compensate for this, but they generally involve tradeoffs or advanced techniques such as stacking.
Is the reason you can’t get close because of the physical size of the camera/lens, or because of the minimum focus distance of the lens?
You probably want a somewhat higher shutter speed for mobile subjects, particularly if you are handholding. If this means the camera is not getting enough light, you can adjust other settings (lower aperture number, higher ISO) or consider using a flash.
One thing I have found can help when learning how to take better photos with a new camera is to experiment with different settings using a small inanimate subject under lighting conditions (=outdoor) similar to what you would encounter in the field. You can also check the metadata on photos that you felt turned out well using automatic mode; most cameras will save information about the settings used to take the photo so you can use that information to get some examples of what choices the camera algorithm makes when confronted with various situations.
Yes, I think there’s always a light problem with macro photography. Its seems to me that there’s something about the configuration of elements within the lens that necessarily cause a lot of light drop-off. I’m not sure the extent to which this is true, or what the exact science behind it might be, but it certainly seems that way to me. The other reason is of course that it’s exraordinarily difficult to get close enough to the subject without casting a a massive shadow on it.
Because of that light drop-off I always use a flash. It’s more expense, I know, but it is a game changer. Sorry, in my initial post I’d kind of taken that as granted. I have experimented with non-flash lighting. In particular I have a couple of little LED selfie-lights that I’ve used to good effect. You do need particularly forgiving subjects though.
You’re right, this stuff is expensive. I’ve built my collection up over years and there’s always something I want to add.
My set–up:
- Canon EOS R6 body
- Canon Macro EF 100mm
- Canon EF-R Adaptor. Needed for my old style Canon lenses to work with my newer camera body.
- Kenko extension tubes. I’ve had both the 20mm and the 36mm stacked on there for months and tend not to even think about other configurations. This will go wide enough to get a butterfly in full frame but close enough for springtails.
- K&F Concept 150 Ring Flash.
Finally, there’s some fantastic advice above from @spiphany, definitely worth trying that.
I do most of my close-up photography without flash, though as you approach 1:1 magnification and greater it is definitely helpful and will get better results. (I’ll note that I am usually working in full sun, as this where my preferred subjects are most likely to be found, and I don’t use extremely narrow apertures.)
But if the photos are coming out dark at shutter speeds greater than 1/60 I suspect something else is going on with the camera settings.
If the camera has a pop-up flash and the lens isn’t too large, it may make sense to try this before buying a separate flash. I have also occasionally used a flashlight to help illuminate springtails in shadowy places. It isn’t ideal, but if one is just learning how to get the camera to do what one wants and what different settings do, it has the advantage of being a low-cost and simple solution rather than yet another piece of equipment that one has to figure out how to use.
(I’m coming to this as someone who is fairly new to photography – I didn’t own a proper camera until 2023 – and who initially was rather intimidated by using flash, not to mention intimidated by the complexity of the set-up and techniques that a certain portion of the macro community seems to feel is essential for this type of photography. Now that I have more mastery of the basics, some of these things make more sense, but at the beginning I would not have been able to effectively use such equipment, nor would I have been able to make good purchasing decisions that meet my needs and are compatible with my photographing style.)