File: 2023_0924_18363600.jpg (723.4 KB)

>>4485226
Use your fist as a bean bag, use burst mode and press the camera into your fist while shooting

File: DSCF2079.jpg (1.4 MB)

>>4484829
The Laowa's great but whatever's cheaper/more convenient to use for you

File: WhatsApp Image 2026-01-26 at 16.04.53.jpg (166.1 KB)

>>4498425
>>4498426
that guy
forgot to say that the lens was 18mm and focuses 5mm in front of the lens. apparently you can't do manual focus staking with wide lenses as the working distance is too small. and end up touching the subject or unusable size distortion
i ended up buying the Tamron new on sale for 500 euro, laowa was 450. now kind of regret it after playing with the Tamron and kind of getting the hang of handheld focus staking. but for non moving subjects tammy is perfect.
now i m waiting for godox 860iii to go on sale to get a powerful reliable flash. but i m kind of torn between getting the laowa (500 euro again) or reynox 250 (70 euro). tammy and reynox give 1.8 mag compared with laowa native 2x. i have also 36mm extension tubes that i can use to increase tammy and reynox mag but i don;t know the actual resulting working distance and iq.
30 stack

has anyone tried stacking those macro lens filters?

>>4498494
yes
https://makrodunyasi.com/en/macro-close-up-filters-raynox-dcr-250-msn-202/

hes a turkroach so if anybody know something about shooting insects is this guy

also this guy bought a

>>4498497
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/stacking-raynox-250-and-202.4811264/

>>4498494
yip, you use the more intense, more protruding ones on the outer side and the less strong ones on the inner side

>>4498454
Don't bother with the Raynox or tubes, screwing it on and off is too much of a hassle
And consider going for the Godox MK12, it's a dedicated macro flash that's sometimes more, sometimes less useful than a proper on-camera flash

I have a 100 2.8 macro which I use for scanning and the ocasional portrait/detail shot. I cant get into macro pictures because they freak me out, especially bc I have intense trypophobia (google it at your own risk) and everything seems to have little holes in it when you zoom in. On the other hand I think its very interesting looking at things close up, maybe I need exposure therapy

>>4498521
raynox have some clip on clip - off system. that is why i m considering it
godox mk12 kit is more expensive (almost 2x times - you get 2 flashes and 1 trigger though ) and seems harder to diffuse. considering the 860 as is very powerful and can be used as a normal flash for other types of photos. i suppose that mk12 could be too. will put it on my wish list. if it comes on sale at good price i ll consider it

File: DSCF8119 small.jpg (123.7 KB)

>>4498563
Macro flashes don't need to be diffused to the same extent because they're usually much closer to the subject (diffusion is most effective at mid-range flash distances)
Also the idea behind the MK is more sculpturing and less uniform exposure

>>4498494
yeah i got some cheap ones and put a doublet element in front that i took from a vintage manual zoom lens, total is 4 additional elements on top of a zoom PnS

>>4476905
>A well done beginners shot like most in this thread.
What the FUCK did you just call my photographic capture!?

File: _DSC8263.jpg (3.1 MB)

Hi /mage/
I took my first ever macro shots, nailing the focus while the subject is walking with such a small DOF is insanely hard. I just try to move the camera back and forth to focus and leave it in manual because the autofocus is useless.

I use a D750 and an old AF Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8, any idea when diffraction starts ruining your shots at high apertures? I didn't dare to go above f/11. Also it's not the D version so no communication with the built in flash. Is it worth using a macro flash or is it overkill?

File: _DSC8216.jpg (3.4 MB)

>>4500848
Ditto, impossible to get both the head and abdomen in focus.

File: _DSC8198.jpg (3.4 MB)

>>4500848
Also the built-in flash tends to be a bit too aggressive and forces me to underexpose in post for shiny bugs

File: Screenshot at 2026-03-18 18-54-56.png (411.7 KB)

Hey lads, I want to try macro photography but I only have a Sony R100 III, it has a fixed lens and it's not particularly successful at doing good closeups.
Are there any ways to make it work still? Maybe with a rig that has a magnifier in front or something?

>roll

>>4501197
Close up filters. You won't be able to screw one onto your lens, but if you find some other way to attach it, it should work.

File: IMG-20260319-WA0011.jpg (127.1 KB)

Shit wa quality and indoors no flash

What if I don't have spiders in my house? What if there was one but he went somewhere and I don't know where he is?

File: 2026-03-14-20.45.56 ZS PMax.jpg (4.6 MB)

>>4501399
also anybody knows ho to avoid this fucking halos around subjects during stacking? zerene and helicon bot get them. tried using the settings they suggest but still get them

also if i have subjects in the foreground and background they het this halos around them and they get blended together like one object
Pic related

File: PICT0018.jpg (1.7 MB)

really impressed by this ancient camera

>>4501361
Neat, I'll figure something out then. Thanks for the suggestion.

>>4501197
>>4501361
Raynox do close up filters that clamp onto the lens, and you can also get a Magfilter adapter which is what I have.

>>4501481
Not that anon but what magnifier adaptor
Just bought nisi 49mm 9 diopter. Was cheaper than raynox on sale but does not have the clip on adapter

>>4501481
does the magfilter hold well with the Raynox? It looks a bit bulky. Might just go that route, it will also open up some possibility to use other filters.

>>4501481
The filter grabs the lens by inside thread not from outisde. Just check some reviews an how it works.
Might not have anything to grab on that lens. You could try some rubber tube that fits your lens and the adaptor diameter. There are some rubber lens hoods, quite cheap on aliexpress that you could adapt

>>4501499
Oh I was thinking of the DCR-250 but it clamps internally on the filter threads, my mistake.
>>4501521
The Raynox is a fairly small bit of glass at 49mm and then the rest is plastic, I have a larger 58mm Canon close up lens with a metal filter thread that I use on mine and it holds fine even shaking the camera about.

File: DSC_0660_01.jpg (1.1 MB)

Tamron 70-300

File: Screenshot_2026-03-23 16.48.19_UYoZEG.png (1.7 MB)

Wish me luck boys

>>4501897
What film will you be using?

>>4501898
I want to shoot Tri-x at 1600, I don't really care about the grain.

>>4501912
Interesting, really curious about the results. Good luck!

File: 2026-03-14-20.16.58 ZS PMax.jpg (4.7 MB)

No bugs to shoot
Shoot some random shit
Tamron 90mm
15pic stack

>>4502097
>bugs to shoot
Wdym? Its spring homie.

>>4502097
Isn't it kinda amazing that they managed to get their name on the plastic sleeve, as tiny as it is. Probably most people can't even read it.

File: IMG-20260405-WA0007.jpg (309.4 KB)

Small dead fly glued to a paper clip
56 stack
No flash, obviously.
Tamron 90

File: IMG-20260405-WA0008.jpg (431.0 KB)

Same fly different angle 57 stack.
Ss
F5 ss 1/30 iso 250, cropped

>>4503935
F5, 1/80, iso 250, cropped

File: IMG_0554.jpg (2.3 MB)

here, enjoy this blurry pos.

File: Dolomedes_Triton-1_1.jpg (2.1 MB)

Cloudflare a shit
Where were you when 4ch was a kill?

File: 1000065165.jpg (849.8 KB)

>>4498423
Could be cropped to be more macro but I liked the composition

>>4501897
sexy camera

File: A1C008A8-ED8A-4109-B5A7-92C42042A701.jpg (2.8 MB)

>>4505026
Water spiders are neato

File: XH2S6814.jpg (970.2 KB)

>>4500848
A macro flash is always worth it

File: DSC_2886_01.jpg (3.7 MB)

>>4498423
I've had this Sigma 105mm for 3 days and on a D850 I've had a few months. Happy with the early results

File: DSC_3048_01.jpg (4.0 MB)

>>4506677

File: DSC_3086.jpg (4.0 MB)

>>4506678

File: DSC_3208.jpg (4.2 MB)

>>4506679

File: DSC_3330_01.jpg (4.9 MB)

>>4506680

>>4506677
>>4506678
>>4506679
>>4506680
Noice

I especially like this one >>4506681

>>4506681
This is fantastic.
Respectfully, and without starting a race riot what's the general consensus on m43 versus full frame for macro, specifically handheld field stuff? The increased magnification and depth of field seems eminently useful.

>>4506766
Full frame is better period. Just carry a powerful wirelessly triggered flash.

m43 is better for poors, weak femboys, people who dont know macro literally always needs flash, and homos who expect handheld focus bracketing of non-dead things to actually work

File: Screenshot 2026-04-27 114458.png (3.9 MB)

>>4506735
>>4506766

Thanks anons. Handheld macro with a flash in off hand is quite the challenge. That spider turned out way more interesting than I thought it would when I spotted it

I'm a beginner buying used gear (except the cards and flash, no good deals by the time the lens arrived) and free software, still learning. If it helps encourage others in the same boat exposure on spider was f22, 1/125, ISO 640 (auto), and flash ofc held in left hand. Exported by NX Studio (free app) without any edits. Only cost me around $1650 AUD all up

>$850 for D850 w grip
>$400 Sigma 105mm OS
>$80 Godox XPro trigger
>$300 Godox V480 (new)
>$25 Sandisk 64GB SD card (new)

I got lucky on a crazy good deal on the D850 though. Around 120,000 snaps on it.

Yet to try focus stacking as I spend enough time as is on one and done pics, but I know the D850 has focus shift built in for when I'm on a tripod and made sure to get a lens that supported it. Also keen to get a TC or extension tubes to go past 1:1.

Pic is what I saw with my eye more or less, just a bunch of spider fuzz.

>>4506802
What's the difference between an on-camera flash (with a diffuser) and handheld? Are you still using the shutter button to trigger it? Do you use a diffuser for off-camera flashes? Shooting a d850 one handed is impressive.

>>4507032

they done 4x5" in one hand and flash in another for quite some time anon

File: basedtographer.png (787.1 KB)

>>4507077
>>4507032
The single most based way to do photography is with a newspress 4x5 in one hand, a sodium bulb flash in the other, and two cigars in your mouth at all times.

File: Sc41dc678b9494821b2b8018db0188e95i.jpg (235.8 KB)

>>4506802
Depending on how much a teleconverter cost for your system if is more than 100 bux you might consider the close up lenses like raynox 150 250 202 505 or nisi 49 for max mag
I got the nisi on sale plus pic related to be able to use infinity focus in the field
Raynox was unavailable in my country but has a super nice clip on filter that i could not find sold separately anywhere in europe since the pic related.
I think adorama has them but quite expensive plus shipping from us
Better option than uaing extension tubea or tele from the ergonomic pov and having to mount and unmount lenses all the time .
They have minimal v good reviews with excelent iq, the only downside is you need a tele lens for them to actually have any impact. But for your 105 should be good to go from 1x to 1.8x
Raynox 250 is advertiswd as 2.4x mag but ia less on 90 100mm lenses

>>4507118
>They have minimal
Delete minimal

File: DSC_3656.jpg (2.4 MB)

>>4506802

Back with a little dudette I found in my hallway tonight, pic related is her coming to eat my family


This shit is so fun bros
>>4507032
Yeah just google the equipment I listed and watch some youtubes, you slide a flash trigger on the camera hotshoe to wirelessly control the flash unit (speedlight) which has a basic diffuser that shipped with it jammed on for most of my pics. Without the trigger the flash would just slot onto camera hotshoe directly and you lose ability to do cool angled lighting like pic related where I got it down low to give viewer the fear factor. You can get extension wires too (cheaper) but then you are way more limited in placement if you want to do non macro or have a free hand.

File: DSC_3665.jpg (2.4 MB)

>>4507128

File: DSC_3680.jpg (3.1 MB)

>>4507129

File: DSC_3685_01.jpg (1.1 MB)

>>4507130
ok last of this subject, who held still the whole time, very cooperative 5/7 would work with again

File: DSC_3578.jpg (2.5 MB)

>>4507132
Playing around with more inanimate objects has ben enjoyable too

File: DSC_3588.jpg (1.3 MB)

>>4507134
Really really like this one

File: DSC_3592.jpg (3.6 MB)

>>4507136
last for now, macro makes this look like corrugated iron sheeting at first.

Also a good example of why off camera flash is good, hard side lighting is easy way to add drama

Hope you enjoyed anons, I know I did

File: DSC_3548_01.jpg (2.4 MB)

>>4507118

Also thanks anon, the Sigma 105mm is 62mm ring so would the Raynox snap ons cause more vignetting than a suitable teleconverter? And are extension tubes worse than either? I have not done much research yet. I like the rapid filter system, changing lenses on the go is a pain and as you say ability to go to infinity fast.

>>4507139
I don t own a tc so can t tell you watch some reviews on yt or google results and see for yourself
By ex here. On 85 mm
https://youtu.be/k9-lS8tHIaQ

On 105 should be no issues. Most vignette is on wide lenses same like with vnd i don t get anything noticeable on my 90mm tamron on aspc =135. But i don t pixel peep either so if is there i didn't notice

>>4507139
The advantage of close up lenses is that they work on wide agle, whereas TC will turn wide angle lenses into a normal FL and with extension tubes your focus will probably be inside the lens. Wide angle is practically a necessity, if you want the background to be somewhat recognizable.

>>4507254
Close up lenses work best on telephoto they Magnification is minimal on wide
Extension tubes work best on wide and minimal on telphoto unless you add extension tubes length to match the focal of the lens
16 mm extension tube on my sigma 16mm focuses inside the lens
10mm focus is 1 micrometer in front of lens at infinity focus
It shouldn't been like this but for sigma 16mm it is. Found out from other ppl comments only after i got the extension tubes

File: 1777543360212.jpg (863.4 KB)

>>4507256
That's the conventional wisdom, but it's a gross simplification at best. Rough numbers for my 24mm are
>as is 1:8
>+4 => 1:4.5
>+4+2 => 1:3.8
It's an old, compact lens, which is about as far from macro as it gets and close up filters get it into somewhat useful range. The bigger limitation is the vignetting on UWA lenses.

>>4507257
For your 24mm youd be better tryinh tubea as with 24mm tubes you could get 1:1 theoretically.
My sigma is .20mag but as i ve told you before is unusable with extensions tubes
And i have only 2
10mm and 16
Could work maybe with smaller ones but i don t have any and don t want spend any more as i have already 1x mag and can go to 1.8 with close up lens
Will try the close up on my 300mm lens which theoretically should give me 2.7x

>>4507258
Theoretically, if the focus doesn't end up inside the lens, which it very well might. The distance is measured from the sensor, which on Nikon F isn't short even with a compact lens.
>could work well with smaller ones
I haven't seen any smaller than 10mm.

Most of my lenses have the same filter size too, it's convenient that I can put the lens cap on the filter and carry them together in my pocket. Much better then lugging a dedicated macro lens which had to make optical compromises for field flatness and shit.

>>4507260
Can t find right now but they exist
They are variable
This guy 3d printed one but they exist for various older mounts. Found out about them during my research before trying macro pics
https://www.reddit.com/r/3Dprinting/comments/pf3svt/i_designed_a_variablelength_extension_tube_for/

>>4507260
https://raynoxdirect.securesite.jp/english/dcr/dcr250/indexdcr250eg.htm

DCR-250 Super Macro lens obtains the maximum macro magnification power when set at the most telephoto position of zoom lens.


https://raynoxdirect.securesite.jp/english/digital/d_slr/index.html

Reynox 250 recommended for >75mm ff

Better not waste your money if you plan on use it on 24mm

>>4507271
I already have a hoya set and they work fine.

File: DSC_4000.jpg (682.1 KB)

>>4507139

I have ordered a Nikon 6T for a starter, +2.9 diopter. Should get it this week.


>>4501897
Wonder how you went, I enjoy film.

File: DSC_4013.jpg (2.5 MB)

>>4507681

File: Azurite macro.jpg (4.5 MB)

Never really done proper macrophotography before but today I tried my hand at fucking around with it. Using a Sigma Telemac Vario x2 + tubes fitted to a Vivitar 55mm f1.4, stepped down to f2 as it's a bit too soft and unsharp when wide open.

Haven't touched any of the raws yet, have just had a look through the jpegs.

File: Dime_macro.jpg (3.9 MB)

>>4507846

File: Polan coin.jpg (4.5 MB)

>>4507847

>>4507846
Moar light!!!!11oneone
Juat use a desk lamp or powerful flashlight

File: 1767626900331805.jpg (4.0 MB)

>>4507866
Yeah I realised pretty quickly my light source (desk lamp on a flexible arm) isn't strong enough. These were some of the better photos, there are others that are total garbage due to the weak light - but hey it's my first time, so it's a learning experience. I'll buy the strongest bulb I can get (over 9000 lumens) to swap out with next time.

Pic rel, one of the very poorly lit photos.

File: DSC02161.jpg (1021.8 KB)

why did my background turned pure black? no flash used, all natural light. i have another one that ended up like this, the rest are normal blurred background

>>4508177
>>4508179
>>4508214
What mag is this?
What lens?

>>4508456
it's this lens attached to some tubes and adapters
https://www.walmart.com/ip/AmScope-4X-Achromatic-Microscope-Objective-for-Compound-Microscopes-New/101548427

>>4508456
>>4508466
basically this guy's setup

https://www.closeuphotography.com/seventeen-dollar-plan-4x-objective/2017/4/3/17-plan-4x-objective

>>4508466
>>4508470
Nice setup for cheap.
Did you ise focus rail or handheld stacking?

you pretty much need a rail because the focus plane on the microscope lens is extremely shallow, I think the brand I have is nisi

>>4508484
>>4508480

File: bug.jpg (530.6 KB)

larva form of this bug >>4508177

File: 20260510 - DSC_4435.jpg (113.6 KB)

>>4508214
Mad magnification. Nice. I like how things get surreal.
Someone here with this mag level should do a head louse.
Film noir jumpy from yesterday

File: 20260510 - DSC_4435_02.jpg (231.7 KB)

>>4508782

File: DSC02007-2.jpg (1.1 MB)

some 0.45 - 0.5 mag

File: 2025-10-14 00-00-00 (B,R8,S4) 11560513 142-3.jpg (3.5 MB)

chestnut flower
a6700
tamron 90mm + 9diopter nisi close up filter

File: 1-1.jpg (2.3 MB)

49 pics stack, sooc jpg

File: 1-2.jpg (3.1 MB)

@300 + nisi
170 pics sooc jpg, no edit no crop

File: 1-3.jpg (3.1 MB)

@200 + nisi
126 pics

File: 1-4.jpg (3.4 MB)

82 pics

+nisi 9 diopter
90 pics

File: 1-5.jpg (3.4 MB)

+nisi 9 diopter
90 pics
forgot pic

File: 1-6.jpg (3.9 MB)

+ nisi + 26mm extension tubes

File: 301 pics 300mm + nisi +26mm .jpg (2.8 MB)

i need the sharper telephote lens.
nisi will enhance the mag but will not make it sharper

File: 104 pics +nisi +26mm.jpg (1.8 MB)

compared to dedicated macro lens

File: IMG_9927.jpg (808.3 KB)

I don't do enough of this

File: 90mm.jpg (2.2 MB)

why is this?
90mm 1:1
why am i not getting the expected magnification?

File: 90mm+nisi.jpg (1.8 MB)

90mm+nisi 9 diopter

File: 90mm+26mm.jpg (2.2 MB)

90mm+26mm extension tubes gives me way more mag

File: 90mm+26mm+nisi.jpg (1.7 MB)

90mm+26mm ext +nisi = 2.19x mag

File: 20260524_195331_001.jpg (641.9 KB)

According to the instructuons i should get 2x mag only with nisi. But i clearly don t

File: 2026-05-22 00-00-00 (C,S2) 89 pics-2.jpg (2.5 MB)

90mm +26 + nisi

What is the max magnification one can use in the field?
Is there any reason to get more than 2x lens?

File: KING6364-3-s.jpg (1.9 MB)

my humble crop of a picture I took of a wasp

File: DSC03326.jpg (410.6 KB)

not 1x coz the motherfucker was not standing still with the camera in his face so had to take the pic from further away

File: DSC03864dd.jpg (905.8 KB)

kawaii frendo suckin some nectar

File: 2026-06-02 22-01-18 (A,R8,S4) 64 pics-2.jpg (5.0 MB)

beetle head
90+26+nisi

File: 2026-06-02 22-33-23 (C,S4) 101 pics.jpg (4.3 MB)

90mm
1x mag

>>4498423
If you want to take macro shots, get a spotlight
https://www.varmaphoto.com/bees

>>4507101
I don't think they used sodium in flash bulbs. I could be wrong. I'm pretty sure they used metal foil or wool that could ignite. Sodium (vapor) bulbs are the amber colored ones used in streetlights.

>>4512905
Magnesium wire + oxygen