[Andreas Keller]

Hi all,
I am a biologist with very little experience/knowledge about photography. I plan to buy a DSLR camera (and lens) to take pictures of the experimental animal I study, the fruit fly which measures 2,5 x 1 mm (0.1 x 0.05 inches). The pictures whould be of living, behaving flies in controlled laboratory conditions. That means, I can get optimal lightning. Fruit flies (as you may know from encountering them in your kitchen) aren't shy and it is easy to get very close to them (~2 cm/1 inch) for pictures. What I would want, however, is a very short exposure time to catch moving (flying?) flies without too much blurring. In addition I'd like to be able to take pictures at very high frequency to obtain sequences of pictures that show a rapid behavior (like grooming) at it's different stages.
I bought two books on digital close-up photography, but they did not help much.
So I really appreciate this forum and thank you in advance for helping me out (although my expectations may be unrealistic or foolish).
Best,
Andreas

[Dabhand16]

I know next to nothng about macro photography. However, there are members who know lots, so I'm sure they will be along soon.

From your description it sounds like maybe you need to use video rather than stills photography to get what you want. video cameras with slo-mo facilities are very expensive, but you can do a reasonable job with editing software.

[sejanus]

The sort of thing you're talking about requires quite sophisticated equipment. To obtain sharp images close up of a fast moving subject requires either a powerfull lighting source or a very high sensitivity (ISO). The typical way of solving this is to use fast recycling strobe flash that puts a lot of light on the subject in very short bursts (typically, 1/10,000th of a second). Traditionally, such lighting was coupled with a very high speed film camera that could run 60 to 600 frames per second. As you can imagine, this kind of kit isn't cheap.

The biggest problem you'll encounter is getting adequate depth of field (DOF). This is the range of distances which are adequately sharp for any particular point of focus. As you'll remember from your school physics, a lens only focuses sharply in a single plane but there's an acceptable band of sharpness on either side of this. In very simplistic terms, the shorter the focal length of the lens, the wider this band is.

As I assume you're on a budget, you may want to consider emulating the father of motion photography, Eadweard Muybridge. He used an array of relatively cheap cameras triggered by the motion of his subjects. He used tripwires but these days you have a variety of non-contact sensors available: visual, ultrasonic and so on. What you could do is set up your cheap cameras with close-up lenses along the flight path of the insect and fire them as the insect breaks a signal, such as a light beam. Each camera could be connected to its own (cheap) flash. If you look for a flash with distance control, i.e. the closer the flash is to the subject the less light it casts, then you can rely on getting a relatively short flash burst, down to 1/6,000th of second is not uncommon.

Unfortunately, sensors that can operate at these speeds aren't that common but film is surprisingly good at handling very short exposures, so this may be a good use for all those very cheap film cameras that the dealers can't sell

Actually, thinking about it, another approach might be an old 16mm film camera with a 60 frames per second capability and a strobe system, plus some method of linking the flash to the shutter. I've seen old Bolex H16 cameras with this modification from time to time.

One thing seems fairly certain, if you don't want to spend a LOT of money, you're going to have to think laterally. In the meantime, do a Google search for 'high speed photography', you'll find a lot of useful information on the web. Here's a usefull site to start you off: High-Speed Visual Imaging

[Andreas Keller]

Thanks for the detailed responses so far. This really is a friendly site.
I may back-paddle a little, or define better what I want to do. I understand what has been said about the sophisticated equipment. There are people studying the wing kinematics in flies and they use a Kodak Motioncorder with 5000 frames/s and a shutter speed of 1microsecond. That's not what I want to do. That's also not what I can afford to do. I am more interested in the aesthetics and composition of the pictures. The serial exposures aren't the most important part. I just came across a review for the Leica Digilu 3 online and it said that it had a capability for 3 serial exposures per second. This is the only DSLR I found that has "serila exposure" and I wonder if there are others. I will research the idea of the modified Bolex H16 because I like that idea. But in general picture quality is more important to me than temporal resolution. (my flies walk at 2cm/sec and fly at 10cm/sec).
Thanks again for the interesting aspects to think about and for your help

[sejanus]

Now I understand where you're coming from!

You'll find that nearly all DSLRs can manage 3 frames per second. What you'll then want is a DSLR that can take a lens capable of giving you the magnification you want, probably around twice life size.

A very nice solution for that is a Canon body with the 60mm EFS ( Canon EF-S 60 mm F2.8 macro lens: Digital Photography Review ) plus a set of extension tubes. Add a ring flash system and you'll be pretty close to home and dry.

I'd suggest investigating third party flash systems as the Canon products are very good but also very pricey. When it comes to apportioning your budget, I'd place the lens as your highest priority, then the flash and the camera last. Remember that there's a fair number of second hand bodies on the market now so, if money's tight, get one of those and you can upgrade later if necessary. The Eos 10D is usually available for around £350 and will do a marvellous job. Start by looking at Ffordes ( https://secure.ffordes.com/index.htm ) or the London Camera Exchange ( Second hand cameras, camera part exchange, digital cameras UK, used cameras, photographic shops, England )

Nikon kit is every bit as good as Canon but I think you'll find that Canon is slightly better value at the moment - I use both so I have no axe to grind. One very usefull point: Film bodies are dirt cheap now. If you're really tight for money, you could always get one of those and move to digital when funds permit. On that front, the two bodies I'd look at are the Canon Eos 5 (seriously cheap but can hit 5 frames per second) and the Nikon F4 (dearer but even faster and built like a Challenger tank). Bear in mind that the Canon 60mm is designed for digital Eos models only, so you'd have to choose a different lens such as the Sigma 70mm macro lens: ePHOTOzine.com - Equipment - Reviews - Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro.

Good luck!