buff
Contributor
I am going to get a macro kit for my MMIIEX and was wondering which one photographers recommended-the 1:3 or the 1:2???
thanks.
thanks.
1:3 or 1:2????????
- Thread starter buff
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Hey, Buff,
The real question is, "How good is your eyesight?" The more extreme the tube, the smaller the subject must be. I have a 1:3 for my Nikonos and that works fine for most of my macro photography. With my 35mm lens I get a 3/4" depth of field and have even taken a "portrait" of a cooperative trumpetfish, for example. When you go to 1:2, you have only a 3/8" depth of field and a smaller span for the photo.
I guess if you are doing wire gobies, baby cowries, etc. the 1:2 would be great. However, I think a 1:3 would be a good place to jump into the world of macrophotography.
By the way, one of the real pluses of macro is that it forces you to look for the little things on the reef and in the sand. It can open a whole new world. Also, coral can become a lot more interesting with macro. I love some of my photos of maze coral, Christmas tree worms, nudibranchs, etc.; and those photos would be lost with a 15mm or 20mm lens.
Have fun,
Joewr
The real question is, "How good is your eyesight?" The more extreme the tube, the smaller the subject must be. I have a 1:3 for my Nikonos and that works fine for most of my macro photography. With my 35mm lens I get a 3/4" depth of field and have even taken a "portrait" of a cooperative trumpetfish, for example. When you go to 1:2, you have only a 3/8" depth of field and a smaller span for the photo.
I guess if you are doing wire gobies, baby cowries, etc. the 1:2 would be great. However, I think a 1:3 would be a good place to jump into the world of macrophotography.
By the way, one of the real pluses of macro is that it forces you to look for the little things on the reef and in the sand. It can open a whole new world. Also, coral can become a lot more interesting with macro. I love some of my photos of maze coral, Christmas tree worms, nudibranchs, etc.; and those photos would be lost with a 15mm or 20mm lens.
Have fun,
Joewr
OP
buff
Contributor
Thanks for that reply - it really helped.
Mike
Mike
Similar threads
