|
I might do some macro this week. Anywhere in particular you guys like to go for bug shots? I don't know if I should seek out a flower garden or just find a spot in the woods.
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 03:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
Haggins posted:I might do some macro this week. Anywhere in particular you guys like to go for bug shots? I don't know if I should seek out a flower garden or just find a spot in the woods. I just look in random woodsy areas, but a friend of mine prefers to go to the local botanical gardens and photograph stuff there. He gets a hell of a lot more butterfly keepers than I do since I guess they're more used to people around there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 04:13
|
|
|
BioTech posted:Has anyone here tried Magic Lantern? I read it has a focus stacking setting where it automatically moves between two selected focus depths taking pictures along the way. Do it, CHDK and ML are nothing short of amazing. http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Unified/UserGuide I haven't tried stacking yet, but I'm really digging focus peaking. The page I linked above shows demo videos for most features, including focus stacking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 02:21
|
|
|
As much as I love my a77, it makes macro work really tough - diffraction sets in around f/6.3, though with good glass, your image quality is still good to about f/11. I guess I could just keep my distance and heavily crop the image? Anyway, this is a bumblebee that was hanging out in front of my house this weekend. I think it must have just come out of hibernation or something, as it stayed still for me for about ten minutes. It wasn't until a hair blew into it that it started moving around. DSC04774 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr  DSC04784 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 07:35
|
|
|
A 70-300mm is a macro lens right?  
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 08:18
|
|
|
 Botanic Gardens 7-1 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2012 13:22
|
|
|
 Untitled by dtloken, on Flickr Playing with my $10 extension tubes from eBay on my NEX using my Minolta MC Rokkor 50mm f1.7. I need to find a (cheap) legacy lens for macro stuff. This is fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
OK folks, I need some help here. Can anyone identify this guy?  IMG_5381.jpg by Brian.M.K, on Flickr Sorry for lack of scale (and super poo poo photo) they're only a couple mm across, kinda look like little rocks until you notice that they move. We're getting a bunch of them falling out of our skylight onto the carpet. Help!
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2012 23:45
|
|
|
Rot posted:OK folks, I need some help here. Try the Critterquest thread, they're a very knowledgeable bunch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
seravid posted:Try the Critterquest thread, they're a very knowledgeable bunch. I think I figured it out: http://www.livingwithbugs.com/carpet_beetle.html Hurray!
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2012 12:05
|
|
|
My first macro shots...  DSC_9295 by Sebas JM, on Flickr  DSC_9308 by Sebas JM, on Flickr  DSC_9329 by Sebas JM, on Flickr  DSC_9337 by Sebas JM, on Flickr  IL gatto Harry... by Sebas JM, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 01:55
|
|
|
Some flowerrrrs Ever-opening. by falamhachd, on Flickr  crinkles by falamhachd, on Flickr  Whether wither by falamhachd, on Flickr I need to find some less boring, but immobile subjects.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
 Bee 6359  Mosquito 6378-6383 I'm not really happy with these, but whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 10:31
|
|
|
Some ice formations I came across when I was ice fishing Jääkiteitä by Sami Kaukolinna, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 16:58
|
|
|
Rovasti posted:Some ice formations I came across when I was ice fishing Nice! The gradient of cool colors works really well. Have anything with higher magnification? seravid fucked around with this message at 23:16 on Apr 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 23:11
|
|
|
Hello there little guy!
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 16:52
|
|
|
seravid posted:Nice! The gradient of cool colors works really well. Have anything with higher magnification? Thanks! No, not of this particular scene. But here is a picture of a bee I shot today:  Mehiläinen by Sami Kaukolinna, on Flickr and a spider:  Hämähäkki 8 by Sami Kaukolinna, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Couldn't help it Great picture by the way. I really like the use of scale and focus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
Hey all, I'm primarily a macro photographer and am looking at a major upgrade recently. I shoot exclusively on the field, insects and flowers, and am trying to find a setup that's simple, portable, and powerful. I prefer to shoot without a tripod/monopod, and while the lighting setups in this thread produce some great pictures, they look waaay too bulky and cumbersome to be carrying along on ten mile hikes, especially since I swap between macros and a wide angle pretty frequently, for landscape shots. I notice most people in this thread shoot Canon, but I was wondering if anyone had any experience with a lighting system like this R1 Wireless Close-Up Speedlight System, which looks pretty drat nifty to me. It's a hefty $500 but looks really robust and unobtrusive. Note, I do not shoot Nikon yet--I'm upgrading from an entry level Olympus E-410 and have not decided yet whether I'm going to switch to Canon or Nikon. As an entomologist I primarily shoot macro, so whichever manufacturer offers me the lens and lighting system that suits my needs will be the manufacturer I go to. So, has anyone tried a lighting system like this or have recommendations for a convenient lighting solution?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
Pitnicker posted:Hey all, Regarding your choice of system, since you want simple and portable I think Canon with their MP-E is hard to beat. No need to mess around with tubes or close-up lenses, but keep in mind it won't focus at infinity (or anything less than 1:1). Regarding the lighting system, twin flashes is definitely the way to go if tupperware/coke can/aluminum foil isn't an option. You should still diffuse them, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 23:17
|
|
|
Thanks for your input. I started with looking at Nikon, but am now looking at my options with Canon. Eventually I'll also look into Olympus and maybe Sony before making my decision. I've noticed, anecdotally, that most of the photographers in this thread shoot Canon. Is Canon considered better with regard to macro? I've been trying to figure out which is the preferred manufacturer for macro but a lot of people seem really committed to the "format wars," so it's difficult to tease out the truth. I mean, I've seen absolutely beautiful shots with both, but you never see the time and effort that went into getting the shot. As primarily a field butterfly photographer, I've got to be ready to go to get the picture in time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 03:50
|
|
|
As a Minolta (now Sony) shooter I'm kind of looking in from the outside vis-à-vis brand wars, but every system should give you the right tools (with the occasional trade-off) for macro. And there's always Tamron and Sigma. That said, I'm confused. You were looking at twin flashes but now you say you'll be shooting butterflies? How high will you go regarding magnification? Because if you want to capture the whole body, a twin flash isn't your best bet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 04:16
|
|
|
So I have an old Nikon 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AI lens with a macro mode (only does 1:4 magnification though) and found this cool caterpillar in my yard and decided to give it a try, not too bad. Caterpillar by jhunter!, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 06:06
|
|
|
seravid posted:That said, I'm confused. You were looking at twin flashes but now you say you'll be shooting butterflies? How high will you go regarding magnification? Because if you want to capture the whole body, a twin flash isn't your best bet. If it's got six legs and an exoskeleton, I shoot it  I also make exceptions for spiders and lizards. I really prefer shooting in natural light, so I'm mostly looking for a versatile flash system to supplement normal sunlight. The Nikon system I was looking at is similar to the Canon MT-24EX Macro Twin Lite Flash, only wireless. Why wouldn't a dual flash be ideal? From what I've read, I thought this dual flash form factor was very well received among macro photographers? What sort of flash would you recommend?The Nikon system appeals to me because it's wireless, attaches to the front of the lens, and would enable me to go from zero to shooting faster. When it comes to skittish critters on the field, time is of the essence. I also do a lot of landscape so I'm looking for a setup that doesn't take too much time to swap out. Finally, whatever I get is going to be going backpacking and camping so size, weight, and durability are all important considerations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 05:12
|
|
|
Pitnicker posted:If it's got six legs and an exoskeleton, I shoot it If the sun is going to be your main source of light we're talking 1:1 or less, right? At higher magnifications natural light won't do you any good, it's pretty much all flash. You're right when you say twin flashes are well regarded, but that's up close where they pack a punch and you have full control in how you light the scene, e.g. one flash close to the left, one up high for fill-in. At longer working distances - which are preferable with easily frightened subjects like butterflies and lizards - they won't be as effective (especially with diffusers) and unless you have them mounted on long clumsy arms that get stuck everywhere, all the light will be coming roughly from the front, in which case a well-diffused cobra will be both cheaper and more efficient.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 06:39
|
|
|
 Taken using the lens out of a disposable camera. Surprisingly decent, though it's fixed focus at just over 6cm, which makes it really hard to work with. Magnification is close to 1:1 (~.8).
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
So I took my first macro shots tonight! A moth flew into my apartment and landed on the sink where it sat for a while. Moth Eye by anveo, on Flickr  Moth 1 by anveo, on Flickr  Moth 2 by anveo, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 06:47
|
|
|
seravid posted:If the sun is going to be your main source of light we're talking 1:1 or less, right? At higher magnifications natural light won't do you any good, it's pretty much all flash. With my old lens, I tended to shoot around 1:1. Part of this was because I didn't want to buy a nice lighting setup and get too invested in what was an entry level DSLR. Now that I'm upgrading, I'd at least like the flexibility to get up to 1:2. You make an excellent point regarding running the risk of having the flash setup just hit the subject from head-on, which would defeat the whole point of having an adjustable dual flash. I'm looking mostly at lenses around 100mm, both for portability and to avoid necessitating lugging a tripod around with me. What I really need to do is look at the dimensions of the ring flashes, compare them to my desired working distance with the new setup, and crunch some numbers to see what angle the light will be coming in. This should prevent me from blowing a bunch of money on a lighting arrangement that doesn't give any additional benefit. And if I can save a few bucks going with a cobra flash, all the better! One last question: how does the cobra lighting you suggest avoid the problem of having light hit the subject head-on? The ones I've looked at seem to be even tighter around the lens than the dual flash, which I would have guessed would make the problem even worse? Thanks for all your help. There are a lot of great macro photographers in this thread! Pitnicker fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Jul 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 22:42
|
|
|
Pitnicker posted:stuff Ring flash: never used one and from what I've read/seen I don't think I'd buy one. Light all around means no shadows which results in flat images. Sure, you can disable parts of it but then what's the point if you're always only using half the ring? It's a very compact way to light a subject, I'll give it that. 100mm and 2:1 is actually great for a twin flash. You'll be close enough to make the most of it. A cabled and well-diffused cobra also works nicely. Check Danoss' rig a page back (near the bottom), that's the general setup for cobra-based macro shooting. I'm using something similar with decent results:   Granted, it's not the most practical solution but my diffuser comes on and off easily so I can use the flash for other stuff if needed. A twin flash on the other hand... Pitnicker posted:Thanks for all your help. There are a lot of great macro photographers in this thread! You're welcome. I was hoping more people would chime in to offer different perspectives, but I guess you're stuck with me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 03:13
|
|
|
Spring, time to pester the moths: cecropia3 by RReiheld, on Flickr  cecropia2 by RReiheld, on Flickr  cecropiaagain by RReiheld, on Flickr Slo-Tek fucked around with this message at 00:29 on May 1, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2012 00:13
|
|
|
My girlfriend wants to do some basic macro photography. She likes taking pictures of small flowers and would also like to be able to take pictures of bugs. Is a Raynox 250 and/or extension tubes on her kit 18-55 going to be enough or should she go for a purpose-built lens? What are the advantages of a purpose-built lens? Just focus speed and image quality optimized for closer focusing distance, or are there other things I'm not thinking of? The budget is $400 or preferably less.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 02:18
|
|
|
What kind of camera does your girlfriend have? I also wanted to try out macro stuff without too much investment so I picked up an old Nikon 105mm f4 AI from KEH with matching extension tube for $265 total. Right now I'm holding a flash in my left hand, the camera in my right, and using CLS to trigger the off camera flash. It's a bit clunky but worked better than I expected. Does anyone have a go to recommendation for a macro bracket?    Linked to full size on this one--there's about three more tiny little bugs in the shot I didn't see till I'd download the image off my camera.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
She has an XTi, and autofocus and electronic aperture control are also prerequisites.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 17:37
|
|
|
powderific posted:Right now I'm holding a flash in my left hand, the camera in my right, and using CLS to trigger the off camera flash. It's a bit clunky but worked better than I expected. Does anyone have a go to recommendation for a macro bracket? I use the Hakuba L-H1, it's an ebay special but does a great job and seems to be quite popular for this purpose. Linky. As on the previous page, it looks like this when all set up with my DIY diffuser. 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
Love the DIY diffuser. How much does it help for macro shots? I was sort of hoping that the face of the flash would be large enough at these distances that it wouldn't be necessary. I mean, comparing light size to subject ratios it's like a 50' octa.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
powderific posted:Love the DIY diffuser. How much does it help for macro shots? I was sort of hoping that the face of the flash would be large enough at these distances that it wouldn't be necessary. I mean, comparing light size to subject ratios it's like a 50' octa. The shadows it produces are wonderful and soft, which of course correlates to the increased size and closeness of the light source. Hard to say no to at least trying it for the cost of 3 cans of soft drink, gaffers tape and some paper towels. It beats holding a flash separately (I'm impressed with what you produced using this method), I want my second hand to balance the lens and stabilise it as I focus by moving the lens and camera body back and forth. I have a proper macro ring flash, but it doesn't give the depth to the image that this DIY job does. If you want to give it a go at some point, here's the guide and some better sample shots by a much more talented macro photographer than me.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 18:29
|
|
|
That's way clever, I'll have to give it a shot. And yeah, having a second hand on the camera would help immensely. Trying to keep everything steady one handed is a pain. I may just lug a small light stand around till I get ahold of one of those brackets.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 20:50
|
|
|
Some kind of a fly. For some reason it did not fly, just ran away from me. Maybe it was too cold. Kärpänen by Sami Kaukolinna, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 17:46
|
|
|
Honeybees in my lemon tree 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2012 05:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
Wound up sending back my Nikon 105mm AI and extension tube for a Tamron 90mm 2.8. The 105 was pretty spectacular, but adding an extension tube to a lens that was probably darker than f4 at mfd made it veeeery hard to see the little bugs. Here's a mix of stuff from both. Any ideas what that gross little thing is?  This little one seemed like she was hamming it up for the camera, posing and whatnot.  Lurking  I don't think the little spider can actually take out those beetle things. I saw it eating some kind of gnat earlier but wasn't quick enough.   Anyone know what this thing is?  I had no idea we had something so cool right in the back yard.  This one DID NOT like the flash.   Edit: found one more I liked: 
powderific fucked around with this message at 16:31 on May 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 16:25
|
|