|
Atlatl posted:Blame flickr users. Those are some kick-rear end rear end crab pictures. How do you anchor yourself to take pictures underwater? Do you add weights for less buoyancy?
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
I came here to post a butterfly but how am I going to compete with a sea cucumber's rear end in a top hat with a crab living inside it.. Speckled Wood by Aves Lux, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 18:24
|
|
|
joat mon posted:An older Tamron 18-270. Thanks. I assume you took these at full zoom, and I shouldn't expect similar results if I clip this to my 55 mm lens?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
Lawson posted:Thanks. I assume you took these at full zoom, and I shouldn't expect similar results if I clip this to my 55 mm lens? Mostly at full zoom, but variations in zoom and focus give a wonderful range of magnification that will allow you to frame just about any subject. (As opposed to cheap extension tubes where you have to line the inside of the tube and electrical tape the outside joints to keep unwanted light out - then you're stuck with one magnification per trip) I think you might be disappointed with the lack of magnification you'll get with a 55mm. In my cheap and limited experience, non-telephoto lenses go on extension tubes and Raynoxes go on telephoto lenses. I've got a 55mm at home, I'll make some comparison shots later.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:a sea cucumber's rear end in a top hat with a crab living inside it.. mods, thread title please
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2019 00:09
|
|
|
^^^ nature's goatsejoat mon posted:Those are some kick-rear end rear end crab pictures. How do you anchor yourself to take pictures underwater? Do you add weights for less buoyancy? Thanks! I actually didn't anchor myself at all for these ones because the sea cucumbers with pea crabs awkwardly point their rear end straight up, so I have to shoot straight down or slightly to the side above them in order to get any light in there. I had to take a ton of pictures and then go back to see which were in focus and decently framed. The thing that sucked is that the rear end is a series of valves and those tiny ones would retreat way back inside through each valve so I maybe have ten seconds out of each minute to try and get shots of them. I have a heavy tripod but it's real awkward to deploy underwater, so if I bring it then it's usually for mounting the offboard strobe/snoot because it's heavy enough to deal with small water movements and remain in place. Otherwise I'll generally try to plant it in the sand for super macro if possible. Most of the time I have to freehand it and take a lot of pictures to avoid touching/smashing corals or other wildlife. The camera casing is really negatively buoyant with the macro port and diopters so I keep these floats on the strobe arms to make it slightly less so:  I think it's maybe one or two pounds heavy in the water (~25 lbs dry land) within recreational range, so just enough to make my shoulders sore if I'm holding it out all day for a trip. The foam will crush down and make it heavier on real deep dives but I'm generally never shooting macro for those so it's not a problem. The +5 and +10 diopters are wet systems mounted on the flip system so I can swap between them as needed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
58mm + Raynox 150 = 7cm field of view, 17cm working distance. 1:3 magnification ratio = not really macro 58mm + 68mm extension tube = 1.6 cm FOV, 8cm WD 1.4:1 ratio = macro 58mm + 68mm tube + Raynox = 1.3 cm FOV, 4 cm WD 1.7:1 = macro 200mm + Raynox = 2cm FOV, 20cm WD 1.1:1 = macro 200mm + 68mm tube = 5cm FOV, 75cm(!) WD 1:2 = not really macro 200mm + 68mm tube + Raynox = 1.3cm FOV, 15cm WD 1.7:1 = macro
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
joat mon posted:58mm + Raynox 150 = 7cm field of view, 17cm working distance. Thank you for doing these comparisons. This seems to confirm my impressions so far that the extension tube has more effect on the shorter 55 mm lens than on the 100-400 zoom. I assume that's mostly because of the difference in WD though. At any rate, the Raynox doesn't seem to come in 77 mm filter size, so I'll have to keep looking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
Turns out Sigma's SD Quattro is a pretty good microscope camera if: - you aren't in a hurry - you hate being able to recover highlights from raws - you don't mind averaging 6-12 shots to get something approaching ISO400 noise performance on virtually anything else   Honestly though, despite the workflow drawbacks I loving love it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 07:55
|
|
|
 Those are gorgeous. What is it? A mineral or something?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 12:05
|
|
|
Atlatl posted:
Basically - translucent films of evaporated amino acids. It's a fairly standard polarized light microscope setup - the sample is placed between 2 crossed polarizers, so things that are birefringent (like most amino acids) show up in the picture. The wild colours are from a retarder placed between the first polarizer and the subject. I post my boring microscope pictures on instagram occasionally if you want to see more of them!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 13:25
|
|
|
That is some vaporwave right there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
 A neat diffraction pattern on a fracture (cleavage plane) inside a crystal of zircon. I had never seen one that followed the crystal structure this way or produced such striking colors.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
Been getting into my mushrooms. Auriscalpium by Aves Lux, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
Just some lichen that I learned are called "British Soldier" lichen because of the red tips. I liked the red pop on the dull green. British Soldier Lichen by Kevin Long, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2019 14:09
|
|
|
First time playing with a bellows, was a lot of fun. 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 03:46
|
|
|
This isn't the most macro of macro but I like it and can't think of a better place to post it. P5042016069 by Cody P, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:This isn't the most macro of macro but I like it and can't think of a better place to post it. I get a very cool 60s Mad Men kind of vibe from this. Love it. I saw a massive butterfly migration a couple of weeks ago. They were literally just passing by, easily 20+ butterflies per minute for several hours, didn't stop on any of the flowers in my garden, so I didn't feel bad about not being able to capture a good shot. But today I had a microburst of activity. I am happy to have traded my 1:2 MF macro for a 1:1 AF macro.   
theHUNGERian fucked around with this message at 01:28 on May 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
 Red Tailed Bumblebee by Aves Lux, on Flickr  Carder Bee by Aves Lux, on Flickr It's World Bee Day! Man bumblebees are hard to photograph.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
Little guy I found on a hike the other day.  Salamander by Kevin Long, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 14:28
|
|
|
UV flashlights + scorpions is always fun. Finding them is so goddamn easy. Scorpion inside strangler fig by Jason the Hutt, on Flickr Paravaejovis sp. by Jason the Hutt, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:UV flashlights + scorpions is always fun. Finding them is so goddamn easy. Those are both amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 03:25
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2019 18:33
|
|
|
rip underwater animal macro, long live industrial macro for school   
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 03:56
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Those are both amazing. Thanks! I get most of my best pics at Bugshot workshops. Tagging along with professional entomologists and people with amazing field technique is super fun if you get a chance.  Capnobotes fuliginosus by Jason the Hutt, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
Atlatl posted:rip underwater animal macro, long live industrial macro for school We will always have that jarlywarly fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Jun 8, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 17:17
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2019 00:38
|
|
|
Love the bubbles, it's so clean.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2019 09:44
|
|
|
hot 2x action Zebra Jumping Spider 2x by Aves Lux, on Flickr jarlywarly fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
Nice spider! I keep meaning to post some things here for critique but always forget. Plus the thread is kinda dead. Anyone want to recommend an upgrade to my light system that would be easy to take on hikes? I usually walk with my camera shoulder strapped with the flash and diffuser on it, but my current basic light setup doesn't point downward enough for super close shots. Ring flashes seem ok but I see a lot of criticism about how they only give a frontal blast of light. Thinking about one of the dual-light rigs with the bendy arms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
What lens you carrying?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:What lens you carrying? 100mm f/2.8, the older version on a canon 77D. Been using a 580 ex II speedlite with a 6 in diffuser. I was going to start practicing using the off-mount cord to shoot one handed, but that kinda seems like a pain in the rear end sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
Fingers McLongDong posted:Thinking about one of the dual-light rigs with the bendy arms. The bendy arm twin flash is really the best option for good light diffused field shooting. There are other good options, and I’ve used a lot of them, but the KX-800 is the best. Put some roscolux vellum sheets under it attached to the lens with the arms set back a bit and you are all set. edit: recent examples I shot: https://flic.kr/p/2g9MJPT https://flic.kr/p/2g9MJrP In my opinion images look best when you only have one specular highlight (there is only one sky, one sun). So I aim to have the two flash heads diffused highlights merge together in one using a single wide sheet of diffusing medium. Graniteman fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:The bendy arm twin flash is really the best option for good light diffused field shooting. There are other good options, and I’ve used a lot of them, but the KX-800 is the best. Put some roscolux vellum sheets under it attached to the lens with the arms set back a bit and you are all set. Thanks for sharing. Awesome focus on the eyes there. What's your setup look like with the paper attached? I do a lot of my photos on hikes and long walks, with my camera setup slung over one shoulder on a long strap. I was worried about a twin flash being cumbersome or tearing up the paper while hiking.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 04:19
|
|
|
Fingers McLongDong posted:Thanks for sharing. Awesome focus on the eyes there. What's your setup look like with the paper attached? I do a lot of my photos on hikes and long walks, with my camera setup slung over one shoulder on a long strap. I was worried about a twin flash being cumbersome or tearing up the paper while hiking. I don’t have a current photo, but here’s an older one when I was using rigid plastic. https://flic.kr/p/J7cSGT The roscolux vellum is not paper, which is why I switched to it. It’s thin and flexible like tracing paper, but it’s actually a very durable, waterproof plastic. I’ve been using the same couple of sheets for two years in wet, tropical locations and it’s still going strong. It’s worth the price premium because it’s basically perfect diffusing material. It’s flexible enough to smoosh your camera up against a tree or the ground and the medium will flex. But it’s durable enough to last for years. I shoot through two layers with a bit of separation between them. The venus twin flash is not NEARLY as rugged as a first party twin flash like the canon. I’ve seen a couple of the KX-800 flashes die due to heat/humidity. Mine is a few years old and still works fine, but you can tell it’s much more flimsy construction. The hot shoe mount is getting loose.. But it’s 1/3 the price of a canon flash. I own the canon twin flash and I still only take the KX-800 with me. In order to get the canon to diffuse well you need to add additional arms/standoffs/brackets which adds a lot of weight. The flex flash has that all built in. I have pretty bad wrist/arm pain from carrying this heavy-rear end setup around and shooting one-handed while grabbing twigs with my left hand so I’m very interested in shedding weight where I can. Graniteman fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 14:17
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:I don’t have a current photo, but here’s an older one when I was using rigid plastic. Cool! I'll look into that, I'm all about saving a few bucks on 3rd party items if I can and they work well. Where'd you get the roscolus vellum at? Is yours just attached at the bottom of the lens with some tape? Initial googling shows some folks attaching things like softbox diffusers to each individual flash on the arms, which seems like a PITA. Have you had any problems with your setup disturbing your targets or limiting how close you can get?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 14:35
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:edit: recent examples I shot: That MP-E65mm is a fantastic macro lens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
Fingers McLongDong posted:Cool! I'll look into that, I'm all about saving a few bucks on 3rd party items if I can and they work well. Where'd you get the roscolus vellum at? Is yours just attached at the bottom of the lens with some tape? I use the rosco #3026, and you can get it from BH. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/44042-REG/Rosco_RS302611_3026_Filter_Tough.html edit: I had linked to a tube that fits over a light. the 3026 I use comes in a roll. It may not be this exact big roll but it’s definitely 3026. You can thread rubber bands through the vellum and attach it to your lens that way. Really, customizing your diffuser to be just right for how you like to shoot is part of the craft and fun of it. The best configuration depends a lot on what subjects you shoot, at what distance/magnification. I have a big sheet stapled to a wire frame that I use for shooting larger critters at 0.2-0.5:1 magnification. I have a smaller one I use for 2:1 magnification. I have one with no wire frame that’s just sheets rubber-banded to the lens for pressing against the ground when shooting ants. Gaffer tape works. Rubber bands work. There are so many good configurations that make different trade offs between light quality, portability, durability, weight, configurability in the field, ability to flex into foliage, etc, etc. Personally I use a prototype media holder made by cognysis that they aren’t selling yet. It’s a molded piece of plastic with 1/4-20 threads for attaching to like a friction arm. My setup is very configurable, has a third flash head on an optical trigger for background lighting, has great diffusion, is not very smooshable, but is extremely heavy to the point that I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone because I fear I may end up needing surgery. I recommend you just buy some sheets and play with different configurations to see what you like to use. The real “secret” is to get the KX-800 with the heads about 4-6” away from the vellum so the highlights merge together. I actually do put a little “balloon” of vellum over each flash head to diffuse it a bit more before it hits the main sheet of vellum but that’s really fine tuning. You could also do two sheets of vellum with a little space between them. Get yourself a little marble or shiny sphere to photograph and see what the specular highlights look like. I always test new configurations on a big ball bearing. Getting close and not disturbing the subject is more about learning how to work with the insects and what they will tolerate. I have no problem getting an inch away from some subjects, but you will never get closer than 3 feet from an alert tiger beetle. spookygonk posted:That MP-E65mm is a fantastic macro lens. It really is. It gets a bad rap for being “soft” from people who don’t know how to use it. Diffraction effects multiply at above 1:1 magnification, so f/16 at 2:1 mag is as diffusion-limited as f/32 at normal magnification. i.e., it looks like poo poo so you need to open the aperture more if you are shooting above 1:1 or else just shoot at 1:1 and crop it and you’ll get the same image quality with a lot less pain in the rear end. Personally I find more than 2:1 to be impractical in the field for hand held shooting, and 1:1 is often too close for bigger subjects. I wish there was a 0.5:1-2:1 magnification lens with electronic aperture control. That’s my dream lens. There’s a venus 2:1 lens but it’s got manual aperture so the view would be dark as hell while focusing if stopped down to shooting aperture. Graniteman fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 15:37
|
|
|
I cannot find the Rosco materials in the UK are there any equivalents? re the Canon MP-E 65mm The jumping spider was taken at around 2x af f/11 I find that's around the limit at 2x I mean it's crazy really over 2x you need to in a studio on a rail with stacking with an opened up aperture and good light In the field 2x is for the really small stuff, Zebra spider is 5/6 mm If you use it on a Bee at 2x you get this  Bumblebee Closeup by Aves Lux, on Flickr jarlywarly fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
I'd love to have one of those canon MP E 65 mm, but they're a but pricey and I'm focused more on getting good at framing and composition with my 100mm for now. That KX 800 with some vellum is right in the price range for my next upgrade though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 17:36
|
|