by ʇolɐǝz ǝɥʇ qoq

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am a photography newbie and have only a 18 - 135mm canon kit lens at my disposal. I wanted to take macro shots but can't really afford a macro lens right now. One very optimistic goal of mine is to capture a single snow flake this winter.

Is there any cheap(er) way to take macro shots? Also, any specific advice from anyone one how to go about photographing a single snow flake.

share|improve this question
You can make your life a little easier by perserving the snowflake in super glue. – rfusca Nov 8 '10 at 19:31
Here's a how-to on the super glue snowflake preservation method. – jball Nov 8 '10 at 20:49
I think it's a great goal, by the way. If not this winter, certainly soon. – Reid Nov 8 '10 at 22:49
Not to brag, but I have captured millions of snowflakes before. – Mateen Ulhaq Apr 4 '12 at 1:42
Photo SE Blog - Pseudo-Macro Photography with a Telephoto Lens – MikeW Mar 30 '13 at 23:32
up vote 13 down vote accepted

Yes there are a couple of options for doing macro on the cheap. The most common is extension tubes which are hollow tubes which basically just move the lens further away, decreasing the minimum focussing distance in the process.

If you're really stuck you can in fact just hold your lens in front of the camera focus and composure are a bit hit and miss with this method! See this link for more information:

Another option is close up filters, which are additional screw on optics that go on the front of a lens in order to allow close up focussing. I haven't had any experience myself, and it's not the cheapest option. This post contains a good low-down on close up filters:

Finally you can mount a telephoto lens in reverse! This can be the cheapest option of all (besides freelensing) as you can make a reversing ring out of a pair of lens and body caps, however with your 18-135 lacking manual aperture control you'll be stuck shooting wide open.

If I were you I'd pick up a set of cheap extension tubes and go from there! As for photographing single snowflakes, I admire people with ambitious goals but I think you might be reaching too far here, as you've chosen something seasoned photographers with many years macro experience would struggle with.

Typical macro lenses provide approximately 1:1 magnification, meaning the image on the sensor is life size. The sensor in your camera is about 22mm across so that's effectively the smallest thing you can image. To fill the frame with a snowflake you need to go supermacro, which as Shizam states is beyond these buget macro options. Depth of field is so small (like a hairs width) at these distances you need a very precise means to manoeuver the snowflake into shot.

I saw a great video showing how images of snowflakes are captured and the lengths required to go to, I'll see if I can find it.

share|improve this answer
These are great suggestions for macro on the cheap, one aside though. A single snowflake is really tiny, even a 1:1 macro shot won't come close to filling the frame w/a snow flake. If you want to get reeeeely close to something the MP-E 65 is the solution. I know its really expensive but you could rent it for a weekend for $34 of reckless abandon shooting snowflakes: 5x magnification! – Shizam Nov 8 '10 at 18:23
yeah I was about to comment on that part of the question, imo photographing a snowflake with no macro experience is going to be extremely difficult... – Matt Grum Nov 8 '10 at 18:25
You are not necessarily stuck with maximum aperture when using reversers or cheap extension tubes. There is a "trick" you can use where you put your lens onto your camera as normal, set the aperture to what you want, hold the DOF button down, and then remove the lens while the DOF button is down. Now, the lens is stuck in the new aperture. I'm not sure if there are dangers involved in this, but it worked for me and my lens is fine. – rm999 Nov 8 '10 at 19:01
nikon lenses have a little metal prong you can slide and change the aperture, there are even rings to to this with some control, but you can slide it by hand and hold it in place with something (if freelensing). – JoséNunoFerreira Jul 18 '12 at 17:29

Matt has already covered a number of options, which I won't try to repeat here.

Unless I missed something, he did miss one possibility though: this is to use a relatively long lens on the camera, with a relatively short lens, reversed, in front of it. This is basically the same as the closeup-lens option Matt did mention, but instead of buying a new closeup lens to use, you use a lens you already have with a dirt-cheap reversing ring (basically, just a hollow tube with filter-sized threads on both ends).

Getting this to work well can be somewhat challenging, to put it mildly. In particular, it's often worthwhile to do a bit of experimenting with free lensing to find a combination of long and short lenses that happen to work well together, and only when you've found a good combination, buy a combination of reversing ring and (if necessary) step-up or step-down rings for that pair of lenses. Of course, it's also nice if you have two or three different lenses with the same size filter ring to use as the front element.

While this option does take more work than buying closeup lenses, it generally gives better results. A closeup lens is basically just a short focal length lens -- but the cheap ones are uncorrected single-element lenses, while the more expensive sets are two-element lenses to give marginally superior correction. Even those, however, generally have pretty poor correction compared to even a cheap 28, 35 or 50mm lens.

One other point: since you're using the front lens reversed and ignoring its normal lens mount, you do not need something that would otherwise fit your camera at all. A lot of older, manual-focus lenses work nicely, and can be picked up for next to nothing.

share|improve this answer
+1 I've had great success with the telephoto + reverse prime macro. I picked up an old olympus 50mm for $10 on eBay, and have used it on various cameras (purchasing the appropriate step-up or step-down rings) for years. – jball Nov 8 '10 at 19:53
I find that a reversing ring would fall apart on some of the old $5 telephotos I had bought for this purposes - gaffer tape does a much better job (just pre-set any focus rings that get covered) – invincible Apr 6 '15 at 16:49

I started off with the Macro filters - I loved using them so much that I ended up buying a Macro lens..

My filters were about $10 for 4 different levels +1, +2, +4 and +10

share|improve this answer

Another tip could be using reverse rings, that allows you to mount a regular 50mm lens as a macro lens. I never used it myself, but know people that do and I it seems it's a bit hard to focus.


share|improve this answer

You can also consider M42 thread lens (pentax or zenith) + macro rings which may be pretty cheap solution. Of course then You need to buy also M42 thread mount for You camera.

I am using it for Canon with EF-S mount, need some patience but it is really budget solution with relatively good results.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.