Shooting Butterflies with the Sigma 150 2.8 Macro

[jeffkohn]

We went to the Cockerell Butterfly center over the weekend, I was shooting with the Sigma 150 2.8 Macro which is a relatively new lens for me. Lighting is not great inside, most areas are in fairly heavy shade because of all the vegetation (though there is soem direct sunlight in places to make it more difficult). I used the SB-800 flash but kept it in balanced fill mode because I wanted to keep the background from going completely black. As a result of this I was shooting at fairly large apertures and fairly slow shutter speeds, pretty challenging conditions as far as DOF and camera shake go. I'll probably want to experiment with different settings next time. I do think the working distance provided by this lens is really nice for this type of work, as long as you have a fast enough shutter speed for hand-holding (or are able to use a tripod).

Anyway here are a couple of shots. As always, comments/suggestions/feedback welcome.

http://www.pbase.com/jkohn/image/41736895


http://www.pbase.com/jkohn/image/41736893


The rest of the gallery is here for those interested: http://www.pbase.com/jkohn/butterflies

[Noe]

Those are amazing. If you don't mind answering a couple of questions.

How close do you get to the butterfly?
Are the pictures cropped?
Can I have your Sigma lense? (No harm in asking)

Noe

[LoungeLizard]

Jeff, those are really good.

I need to get myself a macro solution.

[Bill Huber]

I think I would have to say that lens is a keeper. I have a friend in Norway that has one and he really likes it also.


I like this one also, very good detail....

http://www.pbase.com/jkohn/image/41736891


When I shot the butterflies here it Fort Worth I had to use my 50-200 and the flash, their were so far away that my little macro would not do it.

http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber/ftw_butterflies

[wrogers]

Jeff, I am saving for this lens to do low light concert type shots. Another advantage will be the macro capabilities. Thanks for posting these images.It is helping me make up my mind. I saw your concert pictures in Atlanta and do you think this would be a good lens for that type of shooting?

[jeffkohn]

Thanks Noe, Jesus, Bill H and Bill W for the comments and feedback.

How close do you get to the butterfly?

Minimum focus distance for this lens is 15", which is actually about 8" from the front element. But that's for 1:1 reproduction, these shots were nowhere near that. I'd say for most shots I was in the 1-2 foot range, probably closer to 2' more often than not. The working distance with this lens is pretty nice.

Are the pictures cropped?

The first one above and two others in the gallery (DSC_0883 and DSC_0894) were cropped a bit to tighten up the composition. The rest are full-frame.

Can I have your Sigma lense? (No harm in asking)

Sorry, it's a Nikon mount so it wouldn't do you much good. ;)

When I shot the butterflies here it Fort Worth I had to use my 50-200 and the flash, their were so far away that my little macro would not do it.

I remember the threads where you guys posted your pics and discussed the experience. The butterflies at the Cockerell Center are pretty approachable, in fact if you stand still too long you're liable to have on land on you.

Thanks again,

[jeffkohn]

Originally Posted by wrogers

Jeff, I am saving for this lens to do low light concert type shots. Another advantage will be the macro capabilities. Thanks for posting these images.It is helping me make up my mind. I saw your concert pictures in Atlanta and do you think this would be a good lens for that type of shooting?

I would have to say, "it depends". The shots I took in Atlanta were with three primes: 90mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8, and 28mm 2.8. I didn't need longer focal lengths because the venue wasn't too terribly large and it was easy to get down on the floor close enough to use the shorter primes. My exposures were in the neighborhood of f/2.0-f/2.8 at 1/60-1/100 second at ISO 1600, and this place has pretty good lighting as far as concerts go. A 150mm lens is going to give you problems with camera shake at 1/60s, and 150mm at f/2.8 is pretty narrow DOF. If your handholding technique is really good you might be OK, but I would definitely shoot continuous bursts and hope for at least one shot per burst that wasn't ruined by camera shake.

I'm not trying to talk you out of the lens, if you need that kind of reach for the venues you'll be shooting in, there's not much else you can do. But if you can get by with a shorter focal length you'd probably get more keepers.

[wrogers]

Originally Posted by jeffkohn

A 150mm lens is going to give you problems with camera shake at 1/60s, and 150mm at f/2.8 is pretty narrow DOF. If your handholding technique is really good you might be OK, but I would definitely shoot continuous bursts and hope for at least one shot per burst that wasn't ruined by camera shake.

Very Good point. I used the nikkor 50 1.8 and I think now at looking at the Nikkor 85 1.8. Just need a little more reach than the 50. Someday will look at the Sigma 70-200 2.8, but looks to big to lug around (over 3 pounds) I like something smaller. Thanks for the information.

[krviera]

Jeff, great shots. I went to the museum last week and took some similar pictures with my Nikon 200mm f/4 Micro. I almost purchased the Sigma 150mm before I found the 200 on e-bay for a great price. I had to convince the lady inside that my monopod wasn't a tripod and that it wouldn't bother anyone. She finally allowed me to use it. I had asked one of the managers and he had told me that monopods were alright.

[bbailey]

Great shots. I went to the center for the first time a few weeks ago and it was a lot of fun. There are so many butterflys and they will land on you if you sit still for more than a few seconds. Unfortunatly I had no camera with me, but I plan to go back now that I have a 500D for my lens.

That Sigma is tempting. If I break down and get a macro, that one is it.

[jeffkohn]

Thanks guys.

Keith,

That Nikkor 200mm Micro is supposed to be an incredible lens from everything I've heard. A bit more than I could justify spending on a macro though, especially after recently purchasing the 70-200VR. I'd love to see some of your shots from it.


Ben,

If you do decide to get a macro lens I don't think you'd be disappointed with the Sigma 150. This lens is really impressing me, in fact it makes me want to put more effort into macro photography. The image below is a 100% crop from what was a pretty lame shot, but the detail and the quality of bokeh really impressed me. This shot had no post-processing except for a light post-capture sharpening since I shoot RAW and leave sharpening disabled during RAW conversion. A lot of lenses with supposedly good bokeh don't do as well once you stop down a bit from wide open, especially if there are twigs, grass, or other linear shapes in the near background but I think the Sigma 150 does pretty well in that regard. This was at f/5.6.

http://www.pbase.com/jkohn/image/41882004/original

(linked since PBase is acting up today)