Current Body is a canon 650D

I want to have good detail of a 3mm object, money is not unlimited for this. Anysuggestions ?

What does 1:1 mean exactly ?

well, this is a start anyway .

Thanks

This article should help:-

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6519974919/macro-photography-understanding-magnification

For 1:1 I would recommend either the Canon EF 100mm macro or the Tamron 90mm macro.

Hope this helps

Tokina 100 macro 2.8 (or Tamron 90) and raynox DCR250, heres an example but with the Canon lens mentioned above. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1095554

Here's a good site for everything macro information. http://extreme-macro.co.uk/

You could reverse mount a 50 on a 200 with a coupling ring for about 4:1 magnification you'll need a focus rail though and a lot of practice

Actually at 3mm you are getting into the realm of micro-photography rather than macro.

Image taken at closest focal length @ 1:1 60 mm macro on Olympus , I think the Canon 100 lens is achievable at the same magnification

although the Non-IS is very soft and finicky .

A 3mm object something the size of a Diamond in a ring-set is very achievable with the Canon lens imo , certainly not micro .

Never done the double up as yet , but ...

Image taken at closest focal length @ 1:1 60 mm macro on Olympus , I think the Canon 100 lens is achievable at the same magnification

although the Non-IS is very soft and finicky .

A 3mm object something the size of a Diamond in a ring-set is very achievable with the Canon lens imo , certainly not micro .

The definition of micro/macro is sometimes interchanged depending on manufacturer. 1:1 is where the size of the object is the same as the width of the sensor or takes up the same amount of space on the sensor as the object. If you have a 35mm sensor than at 1:1 the object will have to be 35mm also. So for 1:1 a 3mm object that occupies 3mm of sensor is still true macro. However, that is with a 1:1 magnification factor. 3mm is only going to be 10% of the width of FF and as such detail will suffer. To get that small then you need to consider a higher ratio macro lens such as 5:1 which Canon has here - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183199-USA/Canon_2540A002_Macro_Photo_MP_E_65mm.html

Some sample images with the above lens can be seen here - Google Images

More details on the lens here - http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&t=canon_mpe_65macro

You can also put a teleconverter on above and get even more magnification at the expense of an f-stop.

More learning perhaps ....

More learning perhaps ....

I have on my list to start a topic on that exact subject as there is some confusion, including myself. Took me reading at least a dozen articles before the 'light' went on and even so a bit confused when it comes to magnification factors, focal length, sensor size, etc. Especially on cropped sensors, which will be part of the topic.

There is another, less expensive option to this and that is to get an extension tube set. That will allow any of your lenses to be used as closeup or macro depending on the extension tube choice. You can even make your own to test out if you are a DIYer. Another option is reversing rings. Allows you to put your lens on backwards.

Getting Close with Vello Extension Tubes

Photography Life

Extension tubes: how to shoot extreme close-ups without spending a fortune

Cambridge in Color calculator

Thanks you, steep learning curce.

Thanks Twayis in Post number 6, explains alot in a ver simple way.

So basicly a 100mm Macro is a 100mm prime lens with a long lenbs body spacing the lens form the camera body and cost 5 times more for the luxary as a neich lens, in a simplictic way ?

I will be able to use a tripod alot, in a relitivly well lite environment, but I am worried of shadows from the camera and lens and, oh yes, I want to play but not spend the approx 30,000b on a decent macro.

Is there anything wrong with putting Extention Tubes (with electriacal contacs) on a 55-200 (could have been 250? ) for 5700b and play with that?

The extension (mount compatible) will work with any compatible lens. Positives - low cost, no optics in the path to create issues. Negatives - when the extension is mounted the camera can only be used for macro. It can't be used for standard photography and macro. Also, lose some light, but on a tripod, slower shutter or higher ISO if light is insufficient will compensate.

Shadows of course are always an issue with macro work due to the very short distance form lens to subject. A ring light may not even help due to the size of it. Best method is off camera flash(s) with diffuser or bounce card to spread the light more evenly. If ambient light is good then the flash will be used as a filler flash to remove shadows.

If you want to start off experimenting/dabbling without spending too much you could try the Canon 250D Close-Up Lens on your 55-200 - that will give 0.99x magnification at 200mm. I'm not sure if you can use tubes on top of that for more magnification...

http://www.eos-magazine.com/EOS%20Collection/shop/Resources/A383%20%20Close%20focus%20(CU).pdf

You would be best off with a raynox DCR 250 its better quality than the Canon, Infact as soon as I've posted this I'm gonna order one for myself.

Here's some examples at various focal lengths,,,

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/your-shots-with-the-raynox-dcr250.232617/

Foto File MBK has them.

3300b (off brand)

has anyone seen a raynox dcr-250 for sale in thailand?