Medical portrait and macro photography

[loren.jones]

Hi,

I am a surgeon who needs to do facial portrait photographs for medical documentation and needs to do macro type shots of lesions and specimens.

I am looking to buy an entry level DSLR body and hopefully a single lens that will cover both of these needs pretty well. I do plan to get a ring flash for the macro stuff and a couple affordable umbrella flashes for the portraits.

My questions are mostly involving the lenses. Our texts recommend a 100 mm or so lens for the portraits with an f-stop in the f8 range to give the best medical facial portraits. I am looking at DSLR lenses and see the actual focal length of them and then the 35mm equivalent listed as well. Would I be correct in assuming I should use the 35mm equivalent listing when I am looking for a lens to use for the portraits. For example would the standard 18 to 55 kit lens with the Nikon D40 cover all my needs, or Olympus has a 12 by 60 lens for their entry level DSLR?

Thanks for any input,
Loren Jones

[Rhys]

Hi,

I am a surgeon who needs to do facial portrait photographs for medical documentation and needs to do macro type shots of lesions and specimens.

I am looking to buy an entry level DSLR body and hopefully a single lens that will cover both of these needs pretty well. I do plan to get a ring flash for the macro stuff and a couple affordable umbrella flashes for the portraits.

My questions are mostly involving the lenses. Our texts recommend a 100 mm or so lens for the portraits with an f-stop in the f8 range to give the best medical facial portraits. I am looking at DSLR lenses and see the actual focal length of them and then the 35mm equivalent listed as well. Would I be correct in assuming I should use the 35mm equivalent listing when I am looking for a lens to use for the portraits. For example would the standard 18 to 55 kit lens with the Nikon D40 cover all my needs, or Olympus has a 12 by 60 lens for their entry level DSLR?

Thanks for any input,
Loren Jones

Oddly enough, I just came back from a Dental conference a week or so back after attending a lecture of Dental photography. There were various options available but generally, most of the opinion was that the Canon 100mm Macro lens with the Canon ringflash with a 400D was all that was really needed. Add to that retractors and dental mirrors, of course. And that was for portraits and close-ups of the teeth.

Where are you located? You could have a look at Lester Dine's site to see what he sells.

[TheWengler]

It depends how close you need to get. What are the dimensions of the smallest thing you'd need to photograph? If you need a photograph something small I think a Canon XTi and a Canon 60mm f/2.8 macro lens would be good. You'd also need some sort of flash or lighting set up to shoot indoors at f/8. If you don't need that much magnification then a D40 kit would probably work just fine.

[Rhys]

Specimens might need greater magnifaction and might need the camera to be mounted on a microscope. All that needs is a microscope that has a T2 adaptor and a T2 mount for whatever camera.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

I don't know about medical facial protraits but portrait photographers generaly like an 85mm lens x 1.5 for digital sensor crop factor making it equivalent to 135mm on 35mm format.

I think we'll need some idea how big those things are that you'll be shooting macro. eg 5mm x 5mm, 10mm x 10mm etc.

Re the D40 a good cheap camera, the 18-55 would do the job for portraits but is a touch shorter than your preferred 100mm equivalent. It also isn't great for macro shots with a 1:3.2 magnification according to the spec sheet. Perhaps a "micro" nikkor lens would be better if you go this way.
18-55 spec page http://www.nikon.com.au/productitem.php?pid=826-318621fa4c

[loren.jones]

I live in Chesapeake VA. The portrait photos I would be taking would be for documentation of facial plastic surgeries such as rhinoplasty. Sharpness and detail are the most important aspects for these photos. The background is a simple blue green solid color so as long as there is enough depth of field to cover the entire face then it doesn't really matter if the background is in focus or out of focus. When I mentioned the 100mm f8 thing that is just from a chapter in a plastic surgery book on photos for documentation. It is not from a photographer so as I understand it the classic lens for portraits is more like 135. What would be the perceived difference between the two? Just a narrower perspective?

As far as macros some will be of skin lesions or intraoral lesions perhaps as small as 5mm or so, but I always need to leave much more room in the frame for orientation. I would think 1.5" or so would be the smallest dimension I would ever want to use. Other photos would be intraoperative photos.

Anyway I think I want to go with the Olympus E510 because I think it will be easier to compose my intraoperative photos using the LCD than having to use the viewfinder. From what I can tell the camera is otherwise pretty comparable to the D40 or Canon XTI. Is there any compelling reason not to use that body?

Then the lens question is distilled to three lenses in my mind. I don't think I want to go with the kit lens. I am looking at the 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 or the 50mm f2.0. The 50mm will focus at just over 8 inches with 35mm x 25mm min field size which seems like it will be fine for me for my macro needs. The 14-54 will also focus at the same distance but with a min field of 66.5x50. So it gives about half the actual magnification (35mm equivalent max mag .52 for the 14-54 and 1.04 for the 50mm). So to me it seems like the 50mm would be the way to go since it also seems to get great reviews for image quality, sharpness, and contrast. Do the experienced folks here think I will be OK with a 100mm (35mm equivalent) lens for the facial photo stuff or should I look for a longer lens like the zuiko 12-60 (120mm in 35mm equivalent).

Thanks for your input.
Loren Jones

[Rhys]

The colour reproduction on the Canons in jpeg is apparently better, according to the dentist giving the lecture. If you buy the Canon XSi then you get live view as on the E510. You also get the macro ringflash and the 100mm macro lens.

I don't think Olympus has a true macro lens nor a macro flash in their line-up.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Hi Loren,

Sounds like you've really thought it out and I can't argue with you reasoning.

I'm a bit of a newbie here so I can't really give you specific advice. I have heard a lot of people say the XSi represents exceptional value with a great feature set at a fantastic price though. So I'd second Rhys' suggestion to include that model in your evaluation parly because the extras like a ringflash and lens choices are there.

Re the lens choices I reckon all your needs might be met by a simple and inexpensive 50mm prime lens. I don't know what it is in the other manufacturers but for example only in Nikon it's the 50mm F/1.8 that costs around $100 USD.

I'd stay away from the Nikon as the base model D40/D40X/D60 won't autofocus a prime lens.

Assuming a 50mm prime will focus on the Canon or your postulated E510 then you've got a great solution at a great price. Check the spec sheet to be sure or (hope someone who knows can confirm).

I like the portraits I do here at home with my 50mm prime. For Nikons 1.5x conversion thats 75mm equivalent. They are pleasing to look at even if they're outside the traditional portrait length of 80-130mm. I think with a canon the crop factor is 1.6x and with the Oly it's 2x but again I'm not sure.

Why I think a prime lens is that they'll focus faster in the low light of a surgery. They'll be slightly sharper and it's one less variable if you're always at 50mm. As the macro shots are still pretty large scale (an inch across) the 50mm prime should be ok with that too.

I think the ringflash is a good idea to buy.

I'm not sure if the XSi uses the flash to facilitate autofocus in low light, it might do. If it does then that could get anoying. Check Jeffs camera review (links at top of page) to see if it does have an autofocus assist lamp or fires the flash. Again if you're using the 50mm prime and have reasonable light in your surgery it should be ok, I just raise the possible concern.