Macro Videography

S

Seethlaw

Member
Does anyone here have any experience? I've been getting into it lately and really enjoy it! I've been playing around with my gh2 but extremely limited in what I can and can't do lol.

For the people who have experience, what do you shoot? Do you have any camera recommendations? Would the Canon full frame sensors be a good tool for this? What about a solid macro lens?

Any books, guides, or blogs I should follow?
 
Seethlaw said:
Does anyone here have any experience? I've been getting into it lately and really enjoy it! I've been playing around with my gh2 but extremely limited in what I can and can't do lol.

For the people who have experience, what do you shoot? Do you have any camera recommendations? Would the Canon full frame sensors be a good tool for this? What about a solid macro lens?

Any books, guides, or blogs I should follow?
Click to expand...

I have sigma 50 mm micro for 5d3 it's f 2.8 and i can get 1.1 micro realy nice for rings shot and other detail shots. So far since i got my 5d3 i like the low light andvideo quility but i do miss the evf & pop up lcd view finder that on my gh2 have to buy a monitor for 5d3.
 
A full frame camera will have less DOF and for a given lens length less magnification

There are some really cheap macro lenses out there, or to go really small get some extenstion tubes, or really really small some bellows

no need for a new camera

S
 
Seethlaw said:
I've been playing around with my gh2 but extremely limited in what I can and can't do
Click to expand...

Do you have a proper macro lens?

The Olympus 60mm f/2.8 Macro lens for Micro 4/3 is supposed to be an outstanding lens for macro work, and relatively affordable ( $500 ) compared to the other main camera brands.
 
dhardjono said:
I have sigma 50 mm micro for 5d3 it's f 2.8 and i can get 1.1 micro realy nice for rings shot and other detail shots. So far since i got my 5d3 i like the low light andvideo quility but i do miss the evf & pop up lcd view finder that on my gh2 have to buy a monitor for 5d3.
Click to expand...

I hear that. Do you have any examples anywhere I could check out?
 
morgan_moore said:
A full frame camera will have less DOF and for a given lens length less magnification

There are some really cheap macro lenses out there, or to go really small get some extenstion tubes, or really really small some bellows

no need for a new camera

S
Click to expand...

I've heard about the extension tubes, isn't that used for insect photography? I don't plan on going that close in lol. Maybe one day.
 
TheDingo said:
Do you have a proper macro lens?

The Olympus 60mm f/2.8 Macro lens for Micro 4/3 is supposed to be an outstanding lens for macro work, and relatively affordable ( $500 ) compared to the other main camera brands.
Click to expand...

No I do not lol. I'll have to check that one out, thanks!
 
The challenge with macro videography (as opposed to still photos where you can use a tiny aperture and a bright flash) is getting enough depth of field. So as Morgan Moore says, your GH2 is preferable to a FullFrame camera. If you have a tele zoom for your GH2, like a 45-150 or 45-200, get a Raynox 150 or 250. These clip on the front of the lens and you can focus over quite a range of distances by zooming accordingly. Very flexible, very portable, and quality is fine especially for video.
 
Seethlaw,
I think you should give a try to the 10$ macro extension tubes...before spending a few hundred dollars for a macro lens...
They come as sets of 3 rings and depending on the lens you are using and how many of the tubes you re attaching, you ll have a different magnification of your subject.
Here is a link to help you understand how they work: http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Tips/ExtensionTube.htm
Here is a macro video I ve shot with a 550D and tubes: https://vimeo.com/22939737
Here is a wonderful macro video I found on youtube shot with a GH2 and tubes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gKWaQBLppo
 
Be aware that you can't use cheap tubes on a GH2 with Lumix lenses because the aperture will be stuck wide open. That room video was shot with $180 Kenko m4/3 tubes with electronic contacts. (I tried them and preferred my Raynox 250). This caution doesn't apply if you aren't using M4/3 lenses on a GH2 - cheap tubes are fine for manual lenses.
 
The downside of using extension tubes for macro is that you lose light & the maximum focus distance decreases.
 
Sorry guys, there's no free lunch with small sensor cameras for macro videography. If you use a small sensor camera, you get a wider depth of field at a given focal length and fstop, but you loose high ISO performance. And you can take the exact same picture with a large sensor camera simply by increasing the fstop. Either way, you'll need lots of light to compensate for the tight aperture required to obtain a workable depth of field.
 
lyrov said:
Seethlaw,
I think you should give a try to the 10$ macro extension tubes...before spending a few hundred dollars for a macro lens...
They come as sets of 3 rings and depending on the lens you are using and how many of the tubes you re attaching, you ll have a different magnification of your subject.
Here is a link to help you understand how they work: http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Tips/ExtensionTube.htm
Here is a macro video I ve shot with a 550D and tubes: https://vimeo.com/22939737
Here is a wonderful macro video I found on youtube shot with a GH2 and tubes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gKWaQBLppo
Click to expand...

Iyrov, your images are stunning. It's great to know you can achieve beautiful macro shots with inexpensive extension tubes. Seethlaw,
I think you have to decide how far you want to delve into macro shooting. If you want to do it professionally I would bite the bullet and invest in a good macro lens. I love my Canon 100 Macro IS. It's worth every penny. I use it all the the time on either the 5D3 or the C300. My view has always been that lenses are king, even more so than the camera. And you can write them off or make it back through rental fees.

Having IS on a macro blows my mind. Before IS macro meant tripods and static shots. Now you can do kick ass shots on the fly, fast.
I think the IS is worth the extra $$.

Having the RIGHT amount of depth of field in your shot is in my view what makes a great macro. My approach is very organic. I set up the frame and look and it at a wide open f stop and decide what I want in focus. Sometimes really shallow works. Other times I need to see the entire eyeball in focus and not just 1/3 of it. I play with the f stop until I find the right amount of focus that works for the shot and story. Often that means a crazy deep stop like f11 or f22. How do I get the exposure? Because I shoot mainly docs these days when I discover a cool macro shot I never have the time to pump in light so I often boost the ISO. I've done macro shots outside at 3200 ISO so I could get a f16 or 22 and the image holds up. Incredible! If I have the time I will light the shot for the best control and a lower ISO.

Here is a clip from the opening of a film I shot a long time ago. The first shot is a really cool macro of an eyeball. The rest of the short clip is not macro but fun to watch. warning: some of the images are hard to take. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnuRpHkg0H8
 
noirist said:
If you use a small sensor camera, you get a wider depth of field at a given focal length and fstop, but you loose high ISO performance
Click to expand...

...But on the other hand, using a Micro 4/3 camera with a 2.0x crop sensor ( relative to a Full Frame 35mm Still Photo sensor ) provides you with 2 stops of additional depth of field.

So shooting with a Panasonic GH3 camera with a 50mm lens at f/8.0 has the equivalent DOF to shooting with a Canon 5D Mk3 with a 100mm lens at f/16.0. ( assuming the subject fills the frame of both sensors )

This means that if you are using an ISO of 800 on your GH3 camera, you will need to use an ISO of 3200 on your Canon 5D Mk3 to achieve equivalent exposures.
 
GrahamH said:
The challenge with macro videography (as opposed to still photos where you can use a tiny aperture and a bright flash) is getting enough depth of field. So as Morgan Moore says, your GH2 is preferable to a FullFrame camera. If you have a tele zoom for your GH2, like a 45-150 or 45-200, get a Raynox 150 or 250. These clip on the front of the lens and you can focus over quite a range of distances by zooming accordingly. Very flexible, very portable, and quality is fine especially for video.
Click to expand...

Would the DOF apply to Macro videoography? I would assume yes... Thanks for the advice on the Raynox. I'll have to check that out.
 
lyrov said:
Seethlaw,
I think you should give a try to the 10$ macro extension tubes...before spending a few hundred dollars for a macro lens...
They come as sets of 3 rings and depending on the lens you are using and how many of the tubes you re attaching, you ll have a different magnification of your subject.
Here is a link to help you understand how they work: http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Tips/ExtensionTube.htm
Here is a macro video I ve shot with a 550D and tubes: https://vimeo.com/22939737
Here is a wonderful macro video I found on youtube shot with a GH2 and tubes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gKWaQBLppo
Click to expand...

Thanks Lyrov, I think playing with those would really give me a good sense of macro filming techniques. Thanks for the links! Too bad it was so windy for your 550D video lol.

As far as the GH2 is concerned, do you have any idea if there's hacks devoted to macro filming?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top