I COME FROM FAR AWAY

By MICHAEL PERKINS

ONE OF THE LENSES WHOSE PRICE TAG I HAVE NEVER QUITE BEEN ABLE TO JUSTIFY is a dedicated macro, an optic made almost exclusively for super-close work. Perhaps if I had specialized in such shots, almost to the degree of a personal signature, I might have laid out the necessary cash, but my normal bent is to buy lenses that do at least two things well and cut down on the one-trick-ponies when I can. Call me cheap (as indeed, I am) but most of my glass is capable of at least a limited bit of multitasking. If macro ability is one of several tricks a lens can do (the Lensbaby Velvet series comes readily to mind) then great. Fact is, over the last ten years, I have done most of my macro work with a telephoto.

A parasol held by a woman dancing to a concert in a crowded courtyard some forty feet away from me. My Nikkor 180-600mm zoomed in for a faux-macro shot that I could never have made at close quarters. And with an aperture of f/6.3, I got good detail almost to the back edge of the umbrella.

I have certainly done my share of precariously hovering mere inches from a blossoming bloom, but I have achieved results that are just as satisfying standing thirty feet or more away from the flower and zooming in. Thing is, I hadn’t realized for years how many other people were doing the exact same thing. There are distinct advantages, such as a better control of natural light (my body can’t cast shadows on something from which I’m so far removed), a more generous depth of field (macros tend to be pretty shallow), and the ability to sneak into places that are too congested close at hand (like, for instance, the five other photographers who decided that they’d like to frame up “your” rose at the same time you’re trying it).

Of course, zooming in tight enough to produce great results with minute details is not without its problems. For one thing, there’s the stability issue. The farther away you zoom from, the greater is the risk of camera shake, where even minor movements like a shaky breath will be magnified to blurry effect. There is also the need to isolate your subject from the stuff behind or beside it, since that can create a cluttered result. The case I’m making here is not necessarily that packing a true macro isn’t a great idea at times. It’s really my ongoing argument for heading out with as little gear as possible, since a bagful of over-specialized glass can be weighty, unwieldy, and increases the risk of missed shots that flit away while you’re changing from one lens to another. If there’s one sentence I try to live by these days, it’s do the most with the least. A telephoto that occasionally doubles as a macro is one step toward that ideal.

Did we frame up our idea well? By all means, like, share, subscribe!