Macro Lens Comparison in the Field
- Andrew Johnston
- Sep 28
- 8 min read
Updated: 3 days ago
As I continue to dive deeper into insect macrophotography, I have been exploring lens options and fallen down many YouTube rabbit holes and read probably hundreds of photography blogs and customer reviews of lenses. This post is writing in conjunction with Chris Wirth, we have been comparing lenses for use in insect photography - both in the lab and in the field. This post summarizes some of our findings so far for shooting live subjects in the field.
There are many considerations when it comes to camera gear. The first question to ask is what photographs do you want to take? After you have an idea of what you want to shoot, price and availability is likely your next challenge to find a compromise between the most high-quality lens(es) at a price point you are comfortable with that give you the best chance at the photos you hope to create.
Some insects, like dragonflies, butterflies, and grasshoppers, are quite large and you could use standard (non-macro) lenses to photograph these effectively, especially with a telephoto lens. However, the average body length of insect species is probably somewhere closer to 3mm - so if, like us, you enjoy capturing a wide diversity of insect life, we only consider lenses shoot 1:1 (or 1x magnification) and smaller. There are many great brands and macro options out there, but both of us shoot Canon cameras (partly for reasons we will explain in a later post on lab tests) so we only tested lenses compatible with Canon.
For our purposes, we want to take photos of insects that are 2mm and under in length where we are able to produce a pleasing composition and see enough details to use the photos for identification resources and outreach products.
We will jump straight into the comparison photos, but see below for methods and caveats.
Comparison Photos
Small moving insects are hard to photograph! Because of this, each photo will vary in composition. Please consider the following:
Try to look past aesthetic positioning of the subject - they were all moving and we could not always get the most pleasing shot with each lens
Don't judge by how much is in focus - we strove to get shots of the insect in full focus, but prioritized the eyes where possible. Just because one photo is in full focus and another is slightly off does not necessarily reflect on the lens quality. Compare the parts that are in focus of each image to each other.
Lighting can be difficult, and depending on where the insect was located, the lighting might not be as ideal, again, try to focus on the sharpness and colors given by the lens, and not focus on the shadows or lighting quite as much.
Laowa 85mm 2x
AstrHori 25mm 2-5x
Mitakon 65mm 1-5x
Canon MP-E 65mm 1-5x
Next, we will describe out methods and then finally give some of our own conclusions.
Lens Comparison Methods
We took images of insects at a blacklight sheet in Tippecanoe County, Indiana in late September 2025. Our goal was to take photos of as many small insects as possible. We had four cameras and four lenses with a diversity of flashes and diffusers. The lenses selected for this test were the 'winners' of our lab tests and were selected for their range of magnification and price.
The following three lenses were the focus of our test:
Laowa 85mm 2x macro lens - retails $450 new; shot on a Canon R7 body (crop sensor, 32.5 megapixels)
AstrHori 25mm 2-5x macro lens - retails $250 new; shot on Canon R8 and RP bodies (full frame, 24 megapixels)
Mitakon 55mm 1-5x macro lens - retails $400 new; shot on Canon R8 and RP bodies (full frame, 24 megapixels)
Canon MPE 65mm 1-5x macro lens - only available used ~$800; shot on Canon 6D mark 2 body (DSLR full frame, 26.2 megapixels)
I primarily shoot with the Laowa 85mm macro lens listed above which goes up to 2:1 magnification. Chris shoots with the 'industry standard' classic Canon MPE 65mm which goes up to 5:1 magnification - it was discontinued in 2023 but you can purchase used copies for around $700. The Laowa lens can zoom out and shoot larger subjects while the MPE is limited on the wide end at 1:1 - meaning that a full frame camera will shoot a scene 35mm across. We have both been using full frame cameras, but I noticed that the Laowa was getting pixel-limited on my Canon R8 - meaning that it seemed sharp up until you ran out of pixels. I therefore placed it on a Canon R7 body - a crop sensor with more megapixels. See the images below of a Latridiid beetle that is just under 1.5mm long.
At 2x magnification, the Canon R8 gives about 333 pixels per mm and the R7 gives 625. To my eye, there is still sharp detail on the R7 - meaning that the lens is sharp enough to take advantage of the extra pixel resolution provided by the R7 body. However, the other two lenses tested go all the way to 5x - which is far as I can hope to shoot hand-held and get a subject in focus. Furthermore, we do not believe the lenses are sharp enough to take advantage of the R7 body.
We swapped lighting rigs back and forth, but they produced fairly similar results in this test since they both produce fairly diffuse light and were up against a white sheet which bounced the light even more. We used a Godox MF12 dual-flash setup mounted on the ends of the Laowa and Mitakon lenses, or a Godox V350c speedlight equipped with a AK hood diffuser. The hood diffuser was swapped among all three lenses.
The images were not heavily edited, only minorly adjusted with contrast, brightness and blackpoint to give the best overall look to the shot that we felt it could get with these simple tweaks.
Conclusions
We must again come back to the primary question - what photographs do you want to take?
I am often driven by wanting to take images for diagnostic outputs. I want to see damage and what an insect looks like in its natural setting, but with enough detail to show identifying features. For this, the Laowa 85mm has always made sense and I can take photos of both large insects and moderately small subjects along with their habitat. However, I get frustrated when I cannot get enough detail on insects that are in the 1-3mm range.
Chris's focus overlaps nearly completely with my interest, but targets ultra macro a bit more - seeking fine resolution and minute detail. His trusty MP-E 65mm lens has served him well for nearly 20 years in this endeavor, though his light source is more custom and he cannot always take photos of larger subjects.
We had hoped that the Mitakon and AstrHori lenses might provide a modern product to complement my usual setup, or to emulate Chris's for newer macrophotographers. But unfortunately both of those lenses seemed to come up short. The photos are soft and lack contrast. It is difficult to make out texture and small details, even when there are plenty of pixels to spare. We knew that the contrast could be a problem from our lab tests, but hoped this would be surmountable with minor editing.
One issue may have been the bright white background which could exacerbate the issues of low-contrast due to diffraction at high magnification on these relatively inexpensive lenses. A quick test was shot between the AstrHori (which seemed to perform better than the Mitakon) and the Laowa lens with a subject on a leaf. The two images are below.
One confounding factor above is that the Laowa shot was on the upper side of htel eaf and the AstrHori was on the underside, so the greens do not match. The detail seems better without the white background, but the details and textures still might be better on the Laowa lens, in my opinion. The missed focus is hard to look past - but the detail in the setae on the elytra and the texture of the punctures seems clearer in the Laowa image.
I am very accustomed to the Laowa 85mm lens, but it is easy to use since the lens itself doesn't extend, the optics just move inside it. It is easy to zoom out to find a subject and then dial in to max magnification. The Mitakon was surprisingy easy to use in the hand. Perhaps it is because the working distance is more similar to what I am used to, but I could find my subject and line up a fairly in-focus shot quickly - more quickly than any other lens above 2x that I have tried. The AstrHori wasn't bad to use, but it is a bit stiffer to extend the lens out to higher magnifications and because it does not have a filter thread on the front it could only be used with a hood diffuser which felt a bit more clumsy to dial in than the other two lenses did.
So what lens should you buy to get into insect macrophotography?
I think the overall best option, especially if you do not have any experience or existing lenses, is to get the Laowa 85mm. If you have a crop-sensor camera, that will give you a little extra reach, but it will still perform great with a full frame body.
If you already have something that goes down to 1:1 magnification and you really want to get into ultra-macro, then the AstrHori is probably a great place for you to start. It is VERY inexpensive and will give you good shots. It's an easy place to start to test out that magnification range.
If you really want that 1x-5x magnification range, we would probably recommend going with the MPE 65mm (along with a EF-RF adapter if you shoot mirrorless) - so long as you are confident in assessing used gear and can afford the total cost. The Mitakon will still give you some usable shots, but is probably not worthwhile. We really hoped it would be, but I don't think either of us see a use for it given that we already have other lenses at our disposal.
Additional tests and photos
Image clarity at highest magnification
The images below were all taken on a Canon R7 using either the Laowa 85mm or AstrHori 25mm. They are taken of a dead beetle on a leaf for the purposes of comparing actual clarity rendered by the lenses and are unedited photos. The depth of field for the AstrHori is much smaller than the Laowa lens, so very little of the insect is in focus for several of the shots (some of this could be greatly improved if I could hold steady). These shots were taken indoors, sitting at a table where I could brace my hands very well.
Laowa 85mm @ 2x
AstrHori 25mm @ 4x
AstrHori 25mm @ 5x
Though there are more pixels available per square milimeter on the AstrHori images, the clarity of punctures and setae are practically equivalent on the Laowa, in my opinion. The depth of field is much better with the Laowa making it easier and preferred for my purposes. I did not test anything more wide open than f8 because that would be unrealistic for handheld single shots of insects and getting any reasonable amount of the subject in focus.
Both lenses are sharpest at f8, which is not surprising as we would expect diffraction to be an issue after that. When zoomed in to max on raw files, I think i can make out the same amount of surface texture and detail in the f8 files for 2x and 4x between the lenses. I think f11 is still usable on both, especially if you were not cropping in so far on the Laowa image (i.e. photographing a specimen 2mm or longer).
Comments