Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Food photography - which lens?

Depending on what and how you plan to shoot, I don't think a macro lens is a necessity. Throw on a fast 50 or 85 mm lens and open your iris. More important than anything when shooting food is light. Soft is the magic word here, and bouncing light can do more than the best lens could ever make up for. But that was not what you were asking for :)

I did see a demo last year of a new Arri 100mm Macro lens that showed fantastic images.
 
Never done this other than to geekly brag about what I am eating to friends across the country, of which I am geekly proud, but...

...if you have no other limitations I'd probably try to use an 85mm. And +1 on the soft light tip. Also, make sure to get some nice highlights on reflective surfaces. If there are none (i.e. peach) then pull out a mist bottle.

0.02

Now I am hungry... :)
 
Alright in that case a macro lens would probably come in handy. Not sure if anyone here can give you some specific types of good macro lenses, but if not just make sure it has a nice bokeh. You should end up with many many options if you do a search on the web. The reflective surfaces is a good tip, I second that one. If you get some glass or steel out of focus, it can help to get the simplest salad look like a 100 dollar dish. The things and colors around the food are at least as important as the food itself. Make sure it compliments each other. Rice itself isn't that spectacular. Put it on a mildly reflective surface, which also reflects color from something else (like a colored wall) and it already gets more glory. Or put it on wood and it looks like something that was just handpicked with care.
 
Henk van den Doel said:
Alright in that case a macro lens would probably come in handy. Not sure if anyone here can give you some specific types of good macro lenses, but if not just make sure it has a nice bokeh. You should end up with many many options if you do a search on the web. The reflective surfaces is a good tip, I second that one. If you get some glass or steel out of focus, it can help to get the simplest salad look like a 100 dollar dish. The things and colors around the food are at least as important as the food itself. Make sure it compliments each other. Rice itself isn't that spectacular. Put it on a mildly reflective surface, which also reflects color from something else (like a colored wall) and it already gets more glory. Or put it on wood and it looks like something that was just handpicked with care.
Click to expand...

That's why I love this forum!! Thanks so much :)
 
Ramesh Jai said:
Thanks. That's what I was thinking. But I already have a normal 100mm. It would be good have a lens of another focal length in my lens collection- do you think the 60mm macro has some disadvantages compared to the 100mm?
Click to expand...

Focal length is somewhat irrelevant for macro. You just get closer or further away from the subject.

"Normal" lenses do not work well for close-ups. They create distortions, field curvature and you can't get close focus. That's why there are macro lenses. You asked for the best.
 
Pawel Achtel said:
Focal length is somewhat irrelevant for macro. You just get closer or further away from the subject.

"Normal" lenses do not work well for close-ups. They create distortions, field curvature and you can't get close focus. That's why there are macro lenses. You asked for the best.
Click to expand...

Thanks Mr. Pawel. Appreciate it. I guess then I'll have to look for a used one. Don't think I'll hve much luck getting one though. :(
 
The 60mm doesn't do 1:1 magnification -if I remember correctly. Also the 100mm is T5.6 when at 1:1 so you might want to take thaty into consideration. Personally I like the 90mm Moy Macro which goes to 1:1 but has one extra stop.
 
Hi Pawel

Pawel Achtel said:
Focal length is somewhat irrelevant for macro. You just get closer or further away from the subject.
Click to expand...

I suspect a few of us don't agree with this position... you could make this argument for other forms of photography. One of the biggest problems for wider angle macro photography is that it can be a bitch to light... but it definitely is the best way to go for some shots. I believe the original design for the master macro included a very novel integrated lighting option - motivated by the difficulty of certain lighting aproaches.

Pawel Achtel said:
"Normal" lenses do not work well for close-ups. They create distortions, field curvature and you can't get close focus.
Click to expand...

This matters less for some subject matters... I would def consider throwing on a good achromat diopter (like the master diopter) and finding out what you like. There is also the option of a extension tubes.. Or since we're on a Red forum: throwing out the back focus so you can get closer. The main challenge I face when using diopters is controlling light coming straight down the lens.

Pawel Achtel said:
That's why there are macro lenses. You asked for the best.
Click to expand...
The master macro is fantastic and miles ahead of any macro I know off... that said it is pretty much overkill for food and is nearly impossible to hire never mind buy 2nd hand.

kind regards

Michael L
 
I have used Nikon Macros for food photography for years. I used the 105 for close-ups in Uncle Bens Rice commercials. I also have the 55 and the 200 medical is an excellent lens. Also to lighting a softbox is excellent, but remember for macro work it should be small. For example I regularly use a box between 18 to 30 inches for larger food set-ups like plate size or hamburgers, fries and drink stuff, but for macro work I will build a small box on a smaller source, or use a 12 or 18 inch box with some punch slightly further back.
 
Richard has brought up a fantastic point... the Nikon 105 and 55 are great lenses. I havn't used non-pl mount lenses on Red due to both the hassle factor and the type of work I do.... but if cost is a factor I would definitely look at that option as well... It is shame that Ziess didn't carry their ZF Makro-Planar T* 2/100 and 50 across to the CP range... I'm sure they would have sold like hotcakes!

M
 
Michael, agreed, a longer macro gives you more freedom to light, but the concept still applies. You can do most macro work with a single 100mm macro lens, no need for a whole 14-piece macro lens set :)

A diopter is good compromise, watch out for CA and resolution and contrast loss.

An extension tuble, watch out for just the last two.

Since he asked for the best...I gave the answer :)

The 100mm Master Macro is my dream lens. I hope I can own it one day.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top