Handheld LW Macro setup

I have a friend who wants to be able to get good macro photos in field with very lightweight setup - no tripod - usability and small more important than price - Looking at new Sony A6400 and 30mm macro lens- I was suggesting something more along line of Sony full frame AR 7 with bigger macro lens - I am using full frame Nikon D850 with 60 or 105mm lens and these are definitely to much camera for his needs and I have zero experience in the new smaller mirror-less systems - even though I looking at renting a Z7 just to test it out - know it is where we are all headed at some point - but being more a wildlife and bird photographer - not sure it is quite there yet

The a6400 will be great for that but a 30mm Macro lens is really intended more for copy stand work.  It simply isn't long enough for nature use - you have to get too close to your subject to be useful for most subjects as you cast shadow on things or in the case of critters can even be dangerous.  I would steer him to something like a 70mm Macro at minimum and preferably even a bit longer.

The other problem with a wide macro lens is that it is super hard to control the background due to it's super wide angle of view.

Here is a great option:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... macro.html

An even better option but much more expensive (can also be used on FE cameras):
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... macro.html

And my current favorite for this sort of work for Sony E-mount (manual focusus and also good on FE cameras):
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... f_2_5.html

One other option that is a little less expensive but still a LOT better than 30mm for outdoor macro and falls more into the lightweight category:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... macro.html

With the E mount, you would have to adapt with A mount adapter but the Tamron 60f2 is a great all around macro and the fastest lens of its kind. No mirrorless as native yet.

A bit OT:
E.J. from my quick look at the Voigtlander 110mm it looks as though it would not be possible to add a tripod collar which I find invaluable when doing macro. Do you know if you can add a tripod collar?  In my mind handholding macro is not very practical. When you get close to a macro subject your DF is very shallow requiring you to use small apertures to get sufficient DF. And since you’re so close you need to increase shutter speed to reduce camera movement. This is why I use a tripod for almost all my 3 dimensional macro subjects. I also like to do focus stacking for macro where a macro rail on a tripod aids greatly in getting good stacks. I do think that Voigtlander made the right decisions when they left off AF and OS/IS as these are rarely used in macro since manual focus on a tripod is the norm. Leaving AF and OS off the lens significantly reduces both weight and size.

E.J. Peiker wrote:One other option that is a little less expensive but still a LOT better than 30mm for outdoor macro and falls more into the lightweight category:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... macro.html

Thanks EJ this was great advise - I was pushing him towards longer lens for macro - My main lens is the Nikon 110mm f/2.8 macro - used to even have the 200 macro but let it go about a year ago. 

mlgray12 wrote:I have a friend who wants to be able to get good macro photos in field with very lightweight setup - no tripod - usability and small more important than price - Looking at new Sony A6400 and 30mm macro lens- I was suggesting something more along line of Sony full frame AR 7 with bigger macro lens - I am using full frame Nikon D850 with 60 or 105mm lens and these are definitely to much camera for his needs and I have zero experience in the new smaller mirror-less systems - even though I looking at renting a Z7 just to test it out - know it is where we are all headed at some point - but being more a wildlife and bird photographer - not sure it is quite there yet

Lightweight setup, no tripod,---> Olympus.

Don't just look at the size of the camera body. Look at the size of the lens, too.

Another choice would be a reversing ring that can make use of an existing lens for macro work, very cheap.

I too prefer to use a tripod for macro work as I almost always turn off AF and focus manually. When I use a 105mm Nikon macro lens I add the Nikon PN-11 tube, a 52mm extension tube that comes with a tripod collar mount. It will not allow AF, but will allow TTL metering and aperture setting. Nikon no longer makes it so you have to find one used. Here is what it looks like.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... _Tube.html

Joe

signgrap wrote:A bit OT:
E.J. from my quick look at the Voigtlander 110mm it looks as though it would not be possible to add a tripod collar which I find invaluable when doing macro. Do you know if you can add a tripod collar?  In my mind handholding macro is not very practical. When you get close to a macro subject your DF is very shallow requiring you to use small apertures to get sufficient DF. And since you’re so close you need to increase shutter speed to reduce camera movement. This is why I use a tripod for almost all my 3 dimensional macro subjects. I also like to do focus stacking for macro where a macro rail on a tripod aids greatly in getting good stacks. I do think that Voigtlander made the right decisions when they left off AF and OS/IS as these are rarely used in macro since manual focus on a tripod is the norm. Leaving AF and OS off the lens significantly reduces both weight and size.

I guess I don't see the need for a tripod collar, why is this a requirement?  

Sigma has 2  great macro lens. One is the 150mmF:2.8 and the other is the 180mmF:2.8. Also don't forget about extension tubes. They are the least expansive to convert a lens to macro use. Vello is a good source for extension tubes.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

signgrap wrote:A bit OT:
E.J. from my quick look at the Voigtlander 110mm it looks as though it would not be possible to add a tripod collar which I find invaluable when doing macro. Do you know if you can add a tripod collar?  In my mind handholding macro is not very practical. When you get close to a macro subject your DF is very shallow requiring you to use small apertures to get sufficient DF. And since you’re so close you need to increase shutter speed to reduce camera movement. This is why I use a tripod for almost all my 3 dimensional macro subjects. I also like to do focus stacking for macro where a macro rail on a tripod aids greatly in getting good stacks. I do think that Voigtlander made the right decisions when they left off AF and OS/IS as these are rarely used in macro since manual focus on a tripod is the norm. Leaving AF and OS off the lens significantly reduces both weight and size.

I guess I don't see the need for a tripod collar, why is this a requirement?  

I use to have the Canon 100mm f/2.8 lens which had a collar and Sigma 150 f/2.8 which also has a collar. Using these macros was way more convenient than a camera with L plate as the FV stays exactly same when you rotate the lens in the collar. Also the camera lens combo was much easier to balance, as the weight was easier to center over the ballhead making it easier to lessen ballhead creep. I currently am using the Sony 90mm f/2.8 macro and my old Sigma 150mm with a Metabones IV adapter. The Sony macro is easier to use as a lens because it communicates well/completely with the a7R III but I prefer the Sigma to compose an image for the way it works in the collar - but the lens being version 1 of the Sigma macro, communicates poorly with the camera[/font] making it less than ideal. 

Larry Shuman wrote:Sigma has 2  great macro lens. One is the 150mmF:2.8 and the other is the 180mmF:2.8. Also don't forget about extension tubes. They are the least expansive to convert a lens to macro use. Vello is a good source for extension tubes.

None of those will work on a Sony mirrorless camera without an adapter and both are a little bigger than the person referred to is likely going to want given his desire to mount a macro lens on a very small walking around style camera body, they also are an old Sigma design that doesn't play well with AF through an adapter.  And the adapter just makes it that much bigger and more complex.

signgrap wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:

signgrap wrote:A bit OT:
E.J. from my quick look at the Voigtlander 110mm it looks as though it would not be possible to add a tripod collar which I find invaluable when doing macro. Do you know if you can add a tripod collar?  In my mind handholding macro is not very practical. When you get close to a macro subject your DF is very shallow requiring you to use small apertures to get sufficient DF. And since you’re so close you need to increase shutter speed to reduce camera movement. This is why I use a tripod for almost all my 3 dimensional macro subjects. I also like to do focus stacking for macro where a macro rail on a tripod aids greatly in getting good stacks. I do think that Voigtlander made the right decisions when they left off AF and OS/IS as these are rarely used in macro since manual focus on a tripod is the norm. Leaving AF and OS off the lens significantly reduces both weight and size.

I guess I don't see the need for a tripod collar, why is this a requirement?  

I use to have the Canon 100mm f/2.8 lens which had a collar and Sigma 150 f/2.8 which also has a collar. Using these macros was way more convenient than a camera with L plate as the FV stays exactly same when you rotate the lens in the collar. Also the camera lens combo was much easier to balance, as the weight was easier to center over the ballhead making it easier to lessen ballhead creep. I currently am using the Sony 90mm f/2.8 macro and my old Sigma 150mm with a Metabones IV adapter. The Sony macro is easier to use as a lens because it communicates well/completely with the a7R III but I prefer the Sigma to compose an image for the way it works in the collar - but the lens being version 1 of the Sigma macro, communicates poorly with the camera[/font] making it less than ideal. 

OK, I understand the rotating in the collar as to not change what the lens is centered on, that makes sense, but the request was for handholding

If it's truly for macro and shooting it handheld, some kind of flashlight setup should be in order cuz once you stop down the lens to get enough depth of field, shooting handheld may no longer be desirable. Apparently, shooting close-up is another story.

As one closes down the aperture for depth of field the shutter speed should drop. If using autoIso (if available) the ISO will raise as shutter is moved upward. A gitzo  1227 or 1228 are feather light and be a great gain in shooting macro. The longer the macro lens the greater the working distance thus a Sigma 150/180 or Sony 200/300 with extension tubes would work great.

Larry Shuman wrote: A gitzo  1227 or 1228 are feather light and be a great gain in shooting macro...

But they said no tripod

Not to mention some details would be loss when shooting high ISOs.

I don't think they're looking for a setup for shooting real macro anyway.

If lightweight and small and handheld is a requirement, then an olympus  with the 60mm macro lens works really well.  The IBIS allows hand holding down to amazingly low shutter speeds and you have the equivalent of a 120mm macro lens.  Another thing in its favor is at f8 you have the same DOF as a full frame lens at f16.  Here's an example:  
1/13 @ f6.3 ISO800 - Olympus EM-1 MkII, you'll get similar results with EM-5 MkII

Click on the image to see full size............

Small and lightweight means going to a MFT camera and lens. I use the Olympus cameras and their 60mm f/2.8 lens provides the field of view of a 120mm f/2.8 lens on a full frame camera. Olympus makes an excellent macro flash setup with two small flash units and a controller that mounts to the hot shoe of the camera.