tcole1983 said:
Nice shot NSX. I like the look of that.

I hardly use a flash for macro work, but I have thought about the ring setup (until I look at the price!). I know my SB400 works pretty well compared to the popup flash. I have been lazy and obsessed with my 300 F4 lately though...I had several great chances yesterday, but I was too lazy to walk back to my car and get my stuff.

I think one of the hardest things is getting the camera still. I need a smaller tripod or one of those gorilla ones with the flexible legs so I can get down closer to the stuff I am shooting and still have the stability.

Thanks!

I know it would be proper to use a tripod, but I'm far too lazy to use a tripod and I know it would collect dust in a corner.

My father salvaged a pretty sturdy looking tripod from a car, it's missing a ball head though. Not sure if it's suitable.

My issue isn't about the tripod, it's more about the D40 supporting the weight of the lens and the ballhead for it. I'm afraid that the lens is too much for the body, especially without a tripod collar.

I haven't watched the video yet, but I shall soon.

NSXType-R said:
Wow, your results are pretty awesome!

Thanks NSX. Much appreciated. It was my first try with a flash. Given the video above, I think I'll try some more. I'm also surprised that the length of the lens didn't cast a shadow on your shot. It's why I used a handheld flash off camera.

TCole, when practical, I shoot macro with a tripod. I bought the kind with the legs that splay out so you can lower it to about 3" off the ground. I also trigger by remote. The less I touch my camera, the better the chance I have to keep it still.

Nice shot NSX. I like the look of that.

I hardly use a flash for macro work, but I have thought about the ring setup (until I look at the price!). I know my SB400 works pretty well compared to the popup flash. I have been lazy and obsessed with my 300 F4 lately though...I had several great chances yesterday, but I was too lazy to walk back to my car and get my stuff.

I think one of the hardest things is getting the camera still. I need a smaller tripod or one of those gorilla ones with the flexible legs so I can get down closer to the stuff I am shooting and still have the stability.

proudgeek said:
I play around with a macro lens from time to time. Shot this spider in my garage. DOF is a bit of an issue at a distance of about 14". Next time I may increase my working distance then crop. I don't have a ring flash but I did use a Nissin Di866, handheld (in commander mode), with a Gary Fong diffuser. From what I remember of this little experiment, I got more keepers when holding the flash off to the side than I did when it was pointed straight on the spider. Not a work of art by any means, but something I would certainly attempt again and a technique I'm assuming I could improve upon with a little trial and error.

Wow, your results are pretty awesome!

I've also tried using flash with my macro lens, and this is what I got.

I shot this with just my pop up flash on the D40 and a 105mm macro Nikkor.

I'm surprised that I didn't get a huge shadow, considering how huge the 105mm is.

I never went back and followed up on it, partly because I get eaten alive by all the mosquitos in my backyard.

I'm also curious about adding a SB-700, just because I can. :D

Might be a little gift to myself later on.

I think if you want to buy, you can choose some types and then compair their features and price, and then to decide to buy.

Has anyone tried the Sigma EM-140? Not a true ring flash, but from what I'd heard, it works well for macro and is fairly adjustable as to variable light output.

If the only thing I used the r1c1 for macro I would have sold it a long time ago.

Fortunately:

1) The SU800 sits nicely on a PocketWizard Flex5 unit and works to fully control a multi-zone flash setup
2) The SB200s can be used to provide small points of light in an elaborate flash-lit scene... if they fire.

I can't warn people enough that if you decide to get the R1C1 for macro:

1) There is a double catch light from each unit
2) They are not as flexible (in terms of positioning) as one would think. Rotating them around the ring is great, but there's no freedom to move the lights back or away from the end of the lens (yes, they can be hand-held).
3) The supplied arm and diffuser is a bit gimicky. I've used them, but never successfully for bug macro because in the field they are too unwieldy
4) I find they are not a large enough light source

I will not forget when I bought the kit from my dealer. The first thing he asked was 'are you a dentist'? Dental photography - blasting something dead on from the end of the lens with no need for catch lights etc. is perfect for this kit.

Bug macro, imHo, not so much.

Wonkylens said:
. Add a bracket and a magic arm thingy to hold the flash/diffusor and you will have good flexibility to position the light source.

All the above is included in the SB R1 and the R1C1 Kits

If the focus is nature macro work in the field you will get far, imo, with an ordinary flash and a homemade diffusor. Add a bracket and a magic arm thingy to hold the flash/diffusor and you will have good flexibility to position the light source.

My impression of the above video was the idea of reversing a short focal length lens and using it. I think he said it did not have to be an expensive lens.... just reversed which is one of the oldest macro techniques.... And, his soft box, held together with duct tape.

Seems this guy has a lot of field craft and simple equipment. And, I think, having done some walking in the "butterfly garden" now several times, I understand what he means when he says one might go out and spend a couple hours and get nothing.

For sure the video and his commentary makes it look simple. His gear doesn't invent extra depth of field or any other secrets though, so there is a lot of ability in his work.

I reckon he is viewing quite a dark image through a reversed lens as it will be manual aperture i.e. the lens will be set to f11 (at least) so he has a good eye and steady hand.

Beautiful images, absolutely beautiful.

elvishefer said:
This video (and they guy's work) is an excellent testament to what great bug macro photography takes.

Proof , if proof was needed . Wildlife photography is all about field craft not equipment

Well reading some of the manual for the R1C1. Looks like the way to go. It has many uses. You get 2 more flashes (nice) and you can move them any way you want. You can set them up any way you want. A ring flash is just on the end of your lens. The result of all this is. I need to save more money. Dang you guys and galls make to much sense. Thanks. (Ok how do i make money. Make the wife lunch and take it to her work tomorrow. What do you think)

This video (and they guy's work) is an excellent testament to what great bug macro photography takes. I feel silly watching him work and thinking about how much gear I lug out into the field when I shoot...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqRn3at0H60

@ sevencrossing

Thanks so much. I think if I get moving toward the macro a bit more... get the 105 f/2.8VR plus the Nikon R1C1 Wireless Close-Up Speedlight System which will also control my SB-800. No doubt I will build a frame which holds all the reflectors I will use to handle fill, etc.

Thanks much for the info. Now I have another avenue to go down which will drop more money in to the pot. :-)

msmoto said:
I suppose reading the manual would answer my questions,

If you have an iPad. Nikon have an app, that lets you read all their instuction manuals, without even getting out of bed

msmoto said:
I have looked at the Nikon system for Macro... but can I.....

The answer to all you question is yes

the heads,( to 8, can all be controlled by an SU 800 or master flash using the CLS
(option are limited if you use a built in flash)

provide you dont use all 8, they can be moved round the ring, eg you can put 4 SB R200's on one side

I use 3 SB R200s, typically 2 one side, and 1 to fill. Plus 2 SB900s, one as back light the other just to add a high light

a 3rd SB900 is used as a controller

(when using 6 flashes I confine myself to my garden)

I have looked at the Nikon system for Macro... but can one place all the light on one side? Or can any adjustments be made to the position of the flash heads? Or can one head be set up at half power or one-fourth power so as to create a directional light source? I suppose reading the manual would answer my questions, but I thought an experienced tog who has used it can give better information.

Thanks

Big advantage of Nikon Macro flash

lots of light in the right place, so ISO can be kept fairly low with a small aperture

and by its nature, no camera shake or subject movement

no need for a tri pod or a mono pod

and with Nikon Creative Lighting System, forget exposure problems

OK, think this way...the monopod does not always have to touch the ground. It simply acts as a long (70 cm) fulcrum to reduce camera shake. More weight = less shake. At least for awhile. And, I think ISO 6400 on a D4 is much better than Kodak Tri-X at ISO 800 when pushed one stop.

msmoto said:
@ Juergen This is for "old folks" who have difficulty holding the camera still, LOL. And I am going out with a monopod next trip, one with a ball head on top, so I can use one axis as a stable platform. My latest lens for macro is the 85mm f/1.8 with a 36mm extension tube. I set the camera on a single point focus with continuos servo, then do a little burst of about five frames. Usually they are all sharp but one will have a slight edge, barely visible. But, with a nice LED light source, I can bring the ISO down, as it was about 6400 yesterday during a slight drizzle of rain.

Of course, the 105mm f/2.8 VR is on my "wish list" for September at B & H.

So it is the single shot sniper vs the kalaschnikow approach :-)
I have given up on the monopod for macro work. Until i have adjusted the highth and the angle with the ball head, the critter is gone.
But to stay with the lighting subject of this thread...i am also too hesitant to crank up the ISO too much. I guess it is a paradigm I still have from the old film days. Maybe this is also a good way to go, focus less on the right flash output and just put the ISO up.
Jürgen

@ Juergen This is for "old folks" who have difficulty holding the camera still, LOL. And I am going out with a monopod next trip, one with a ball head on top, so I can use one axis as a stable platform. My latest lens for macro is the 85mm f/1.8 with a 36mm extension tube. I set the camera on a single point focus with continuos servo, then do a little burst of about five frames. Usually they are all sharp but one will have a slight edge, barely visible. But, with a nice LED light source, I can bring the ISO down, as it was about 6400 yesterday during a slight drizzle of rain.

Of course, the 105mm f/2.8 VR is on my "wish list" for September at B & H.

msmoto said:
OK, I think I will add 2 cents again. One method I use to look at different focus points, is to shoot at about 9 FPS while moving the camera in and out slightly. I can then see which plane of focus I prefer in post. Obviously, a flash would not be useful. So, I am thinking a small portable LED unit, providing a cool but constant high intensity light source, may work. Has anyone tried this for macro work?

Interesting idea to use a high frame rate, would have never crossed my mind. Will try that at some point.
Thanks Msmoto.

OK, I think I will add 2 cents again. One method I use to look at different focus points, is to shoot at about 9 FPS while moving the camera in and out slightly. I can then see which plane of focus I prefer in post. Obviously, a flash would not be useful. So, I am thinking a small portable LED unit, providing a cool but constant high intensity light source, may work. Has anyone tried this for macro work?

I play around with a macro lens from time to time. Shot this spider in my garage. DOF is a bit of an issue at a distance of about 14". Next time I may increase my working distance then crop. I don't have a ring flash but I did use a Nissin Di866, handheld (in commander mode), with a Gary Fong diffuser. From what I remember of this little experiment, I got more keepers when holding the flash off to the side than I did when it was pointed straight on the spider. Not a work of art by any means, but something I would certainly attempt again and a technique I'm assuming I could improve upon with a little trial and error.