Advice for macro photos?

[Tintype_18]

To start, this is the lens I have, bought with a Canon T7 kit: Canon Zoom Lens EFS 18-35mm, 1:3.5-5.6 IS II; Macro 0.25m/0.8ft.. I have a number of opportunities for macro photography including my wife's flowers around the house. Also, bugs, etc., are around if I can get them to stay still for a few seconds. How can I "cash in"  with quality photos, using the settings on the camera; the T7 has a Macro setting on the dial. Manual or other setting? The 1:3.5-5.6 comes into play, I'm sure; best way to use them? Thanks for your help.

[ebiggs1]

First off nothing you have is capable of macro photography. It is pseudo macro if you will. You need a true macro lens for macro photos. The "Macro" setting on your T7 just optimizes close up focus and lens settings. It doesn't get you true macro.

With what you have as equipment, Photoshop, or lesser DPP4, will get you more close to macro pictures.

[ebiggs1]

The ratio of the subject size on the sensor to the actual subject size is known as the reproduction ratio. A macro lens is defined as a lens capable of reproduction ratios of at least 1:1

[Waddizzle]

Macro is 1:2.  The old EF-S used a life size converter to get a 1:1 ratio. 

[Tintype_18]

EB, thanks and you confirmed my suspicions. I have heard of using a zoom lens to act as a macro. BTW, forgot to mention I have diopter lenses- +1, +2, +4, +10. I have stacked two for photos of trout flies. Your thoughts on this?

[Waddizzle]

Diopters are not as good as a set of macro rings. This was created from an image stack of 10 photos. 

This is what a single image looks like. Note the very narrow band of sharp focus running across the center of it.

 

 

[Waddizzle]

This photo was single image captured with the 18-55mm kit lens using a T5 and a diopter filter and a tripod 

 

This was handheld with the T5 and the EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM. 

 

[ebiggs1]

" Your thoughts on this?"

Personally I wouldn't do it or use them. I have some and tried them but I don't like'em nor do I recommend them. You have to keep one thing in mind it is all about what you want and are good with. WHat I like or do isn't relevant unless you like what I or anybody elses does as long as you are good with it. The word "macro" has a factual meaning and it also has colloquial meaning. You have two places to blame that on. The ole inner web and the advertising department. They, the ad boys, get a little lose and  little optimistic about what they are selling at times. Actually most of the time!

Then you have the inner web boys who heard that word and toss it around just because but they really don't understand what it truly is. However it's not a big deal because the bottomline is still are you happy with what you are getting no matter what its called?

[zakslm]

John,

I have a T7 too.  

I have used an EF-S 24mm f2.8 STM, an EF 50mm f1.8 STM, the kit lens and a EF 50mm f2.5 compact macro  with decent results.   The kit lens (the 18-55) surprised me because results were better than I anticipated, allowed focusing relatively close focusing and has IS (which helps).  

I bought a used EF 50 f2.5 compact macro in order to try my hand with a real macro lens.  That lens (for me) produced some very satisfying results and I loved using it.  Unfortunately, the main board failed rendering the lens unusable. The lens was noisy, quirky and focused slowly but that didn't matter much for macro work.  It was also great for portraits  Even shooting wide open; it produced very sharp in focus details and in my opinion, rendered the best looking bokeh of any lens I own (including the EF 85mm f1.8 USM) . There are some shots I took with that lens that I've posted to the Gallery and if you wish, feel free to look them up.

What I learned thus far in dabbling in macro photography regardless of the lens was:

1. I primarily used the center focus point only.
2. I shot in AV or M adjusting ISO (within reason) so the shutter speed and aperture I wanted to use could be used. 
3. Results with the 50mm macro, 50mm f1.8 or the kit lens were best at an f7.1-f8 or smaller to expand the already very small depth of field for close-up and macro shots.  The 24mm produced good results at f4 or smaller. 
4. I tried to use a fairly fast shutter speed (particularly for non-IS lenses) to freeze subject or camera movement (a tripod helped too). 
5. I sometimes used an external flash with flash compensation at - 1 1/3rd (using the flip down Fresnel diffuser on the flash) or the built in flash at -1 flash compensation.  The extra direct illumination helped for subject not in direct sunlight.

When I nailed it, results exceeded my expectation.  I will probably look to replace the 50mm macro at some point in the future and I'm keeping my eye out for an EF-S 60mm macro USM.  There are other macro lenses out there  including 3^rd party macro lenses that I’d consider as well.

Good luck!

LZ

[Tintype_18]

Lots to consider and thanks for sharing your journey. Hmm. Used? Good idea. Will check to see if an EF 50 f2.5 compact macro is on the market. FWIW, I got my 18-135mm at a used book store, McKay's Books, for $98! Store let me bring the camera body to try it.