Macro photos?

[Tintype_18]

To start, I have used a Canon SX530 HD with +2 and +4 diopters to take photos of trout flies. The camera has the fixed lens that goes to 250mm. Now, my T7 came with a lens- 18-55mm, Image Stabilizer, Macro 0.25m/0.8 ft. I have tried everything to get a photo of a trout fly. Different settings on Macro (flower), manual settings, diopters, etc. I get nothing with any detail. I've read the T7 manual which is basic info. I read another photography book. Same thing, basic but didn't address my dilemma. The photo is an example of the SX530 HD with +2 and +4 diopters. But can't get the camera close to get a good shot but have to set the tripod way back. Fly is too small. As always, your help is appreciated. BTW,  similar photos were published.

[Tintype_18]

Filter set is about $30, 60mm lens is much more, accoeding to previous posts. If my wife and I were still working, I could buy a few more things. I'll use the wife's camera for closeup photos. Thanks.

[Waddizzle]

---

@Tintype_18 wrote:

Filter set is about $30, 60mm lens is much more, accoeding to previous posts. If my wife and I were still working, I could buy a few more things. I'll use the wife's camera for closeup photos. Thanks.

---

Macro Extensiton tubes are far better than those screw-on filters, which only work with lenses that have a matching filter thread size.  Extension tubes can be used with any lens that can properly mount on the camera, AND they do not contain any optical components to degrade the image.

If you decide to try extension tubes, there two things to consider.  First and foremost, you want an extension tube that allows the lens to communicate with the camera.  There are some really inexpensive tubes out there, and that is why.  

The second thing to consider is a combination of things.  Extnsion tubes come in various sizes, and can be stacked to create even longer sizes.  Their sizes are conveniently measured in mm, just like a lens.  The rule of thumb says you want an extension tube with a length that is 25-40% the focal length of the lens that you are using.  

If you go shorter than that, then you may not see very much magnification.  If you go too long, then you get so much magnification that the focus plane may fall within the lens barrel itself.  This latter case usually mans that you will unable to focus on anything.

[Tintype_18]

The screw in filters work with the wife's camera but not mine. It seems the one marked "macro" I have isn't a  true macro filter. Filters I was thinking of is the UV, CPL, etc. Should have made that clear.

Got two magazine articles out and waiting to hear if they accept them or print them off and hang them on the stall in the restrooms. Those sales will determine future purchases.

[Waddizzle]

---

@Tintype_18 wrote:

The screw in filters work with the wife's camera but not mine. It seems the one marked "macro" I have isn't a  true macro filter. Filters I was thinking of is the UV, CPL, etc. Should have made that clear.

Got two magazine articles out and waiting to hear if they accept them or print them off and hang them on the stall in the restrooms. Those sales will determine future purchases.

---

If you wish to product shots, then you need an image editor so that you can absolutely nail the pure white backgrounds.  That should be your primary goal at this point.  The only way to nail the pure white backgrounds is in post, not in the camera.

[Tintype_18]

Wadizzle, not sure of what you are saying. White backgrounds? Could you expand on your post, please? Thanks.

[kvbarkley]

He seems to be answering another thread.

[ebiggs1]

"Macro Extensiton tubes are far better than those screw-on filters, ..."

I totally agree. Anything is better than those screw on filters. However, extension tubes ar not cheap. Not even off brands like Kenko.  It is still money that can be, could be, placed toward a real macro lens.

[ebiggs1]

"...you need an image editor so that you can absolutely nail the pure..."

Again totally agree.  However, it doesn't matter a if true white BG is the goal or not. For the best work a good post editor is not a nice thing to have, it is mandatory. Some are ever free, BTW.

[wq9nsc]

Listen to Ernie regarding those add on adapters and extension tubes.  They are OK if you have a one time need for a specific setup and output quality is less critical but they are not a substitute for the proper device when it is an ongoing photographic process. 

As a retired marketing prof, I sometimes wonder about a study comparing photographers to those who are heavily into audio equipment.  The former often purchase accessories in an attempt to accomplish a task at low cost with clearly observable shortcomings in the final product while the latter often purchase incredibly expensive accessories that have neither a discernible nor measurable with lab grade equipment impact upon the output.  The classic example were those cryogenically treated, oxygen free, broken in prior to sale 6 foot replacement power cords that sold for over $7,000.  If the same fools exist in the photography world, then there is a market for a very expensive "rare crystal" lens filter that will filter out the electromagnetic radiation coming from distant galaxies leading to decreased contrast and loss of sharpness along with subtle color shifts that are not readily visible but still lead to a reduction in the emotional impact of the image.

Rodger

[Tintype_18]

Adapters? Are you referring to the diopters?  Would like to add some things as the 2X magnifier and the 66mm macro lens but I'm financially embarrasseed at this time.