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 :)

Lens Suggestions for Extreme Close Ups?

J

JT Thurlow

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi there,

I am wondering what is a good choice of lens for getting ECUs of the human face? By this I mean the frame being filled with just the eyes and with a "natural" look.

I feel that I would possibly be okay with my Canon L f1.2 50mm if the MFD were shorter though I have almost no experience with macros.

My budget is stills lens level (the few lenses I own are Canon L series), would rather buy than rent.

Thanks!
 
Look at getting a Canon 180mm f3.5L and using the longer working distance to (1) keep perspective sane, and (2) give yourself some room to light.
 
Tair 11 135mm with diopters will get you about eyeball size. That's a $300 lens.

Nick
 
canon L series 100mm macro, great lens for EF mount
 
jordan levy said:
canon L series 100mm macro, great lens for EF mount
Click to expand...

The 100mm is the sharpest macro Canon has (and has IS). The 180mm is a close second with the added working distance advantage
 
Shot with a 180mm on a Epic-M - no grade. Right click, View Image, then zoom in

1vn5Q4.jpg
 
Lots and lots of macro solutions that work for this. However, if going the still lens route remember image shift when pulling focus is much more visible on the macro level.

My work horse 100mm has be the Tokina ATX. I also will use extension tubes in EF or PL on Otus or CZ Zooms. A dedicated macro allows for a but more flexibility than that however, but you can also get scary close with tubes or diopters.
 
lovewitch22.jpg


The problem with macros is that even at 100mm you have to get very close to the face for a shot of a single eyeball, which makes it hard to light. For shooting two eyes, it’s not so bad.

I had a number of ECU’s to shoot in a movie called “The Love Witch” and I was happy to find a 200mm macro in the rental catalog at Otto Nemenz. At 200mm I could be at a more comfortable distance to the face.
 
180 or 300 will give better compression less falloff edge to edge sharpness and perfect compression to the face.
 
It depends on how much in-focus area you want. Shooting the face straight forward I'd go for a 180mm, sideways - 100mm. I'd prefer not using diopters on photo glass - they create too much artefacts on the glass which is not ideal itself, but this may be used as a special look. Beware, that you'll likely will have to stop down a fair amount to get things in focus - like 5.6.
 
Ziess super macro is a good choice I think as it has such an incredible long focus swing in the close end and is superbly sharp.


This was a bit odd project we did where the client decided not to see the faces but zoom into the eye... something we had not calculated for so a lot of noise and possibly not the best looking stuff that went trough the pipe but some shots still holds up quite well. Shot with helium.


https://vimeo.com/254668084

 
I´ll throw in an extension tube, those are available for PL or EF mount and are an accessory that comes handy from time to time. Depth of field is a matter of image ratio but I agree on a longer focal length to leave room for lighting and not showing the camera in the eye. Be prepared to loose light from image ratio / magnification alone.
 
An unsung low-cost hero in this quest might be a Micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5. Breathing when pulling focus might be defined as cruel-bad. These lenses were apparently used for photo-reducing early IC designs to chip size so the resolution was probably good.

One painful knuckle in the doorgap might be the overhang of the aperture (iris) ring which may not play nice with modern Nikon mounts made after Nikon camera model FM2. The earlier Nikon F-Mounts had a clearance shoulder behind the flange face of about 1.7mm. The modern mounts have only about 0.7mm and a very slightly wider diameter, just enough to foul the inner circumferential surface of the overhang in some examples.

The older lenses which foul may be pre-AI models. I do not know enough to assure anyone. Advisers like Optitek or Duclos would know best about F-Mounts on cameras like RED.

Some third-party F-Mounts have the older profile. Some patterned after the more recent five-screw style of genuine Nikon F-Mount may not. The older Nikon F-Mount lenses may therefore foul the modern mount with the aperture ring overhang and may be forced off-flange and off focus altogether or on one edge of the image, although they will mount with difficulty
 
Thanks very much for the responses, the Canon 180 is tempting.

I'm interested in trying out a diopter/tube first (for 72mm thread) if anyone has any suggestions for brands/models?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top