|
sanka posted:In situations like that I much prefer to use my Raynox DCR-150 or DCR-250. They give a lot better working distance, with no noticeable loss in image quality. I love those little guys, and they are worth far more than they cost.   For anyone looking to get into macro on the cheap, a DCR-250 mounted on even one of the cheaper telephotos like the Nikon 55-200 f/4-5.6 VR will get you something like 1.7:1 magnification.
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2010 18:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I have nothing against spiders (I helped a jumping spider get out of harm's way when I was taking a shower yesterday) but that picture is still very I find AF pretty pointless with macro. The depth of field is so narrow you can never be sure exactly where the focus point lies, especially when the AF brackets obscure so much of the view. I have had some success with AF-C when shooting moving insects, though it mostly comes down to shooting wildly and hoping the eyes are in focus. v  vInternetJunky posted:Some amazing photos in this thread! 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2010 03:28
|
|
|
Try moving the lamp further away from the side panel. The closer it is the more light passes straight through rather than hitting the panel and diffusing. You'll probably have to increase exposure time to compensate for the light loss, but your light will be softer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2010 03:15
|
|
|
fuzzies 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2010 14:03
|
|
|
Can't really say, I've never used the 150. I just mounted the DCR-250 on the Nikon 18-55 kit lens and shot this at 55mm. Please excuse the fact that it's not all in focus, it was hard to come at a perfect right angle without breaking out the tripod.  Click here for the full 1920x1275 image. Anyway, that's approximately 40 mm on a sensor about 21 mm across, making a magnification ratio of 1:2 on a crop body camera. Not terrible, but not "true" 1:1 macro either. Since the only difference between the 150 and the 250 seems to be the diopter(going by the specs at least), I'd probably go with the 250 if the 18-55 is the longest lens you've got.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2010 18:19
|
|
|
Hey axolotl farmer could you take a crack at IDing this? Looks like a huntsman to me based upon on my limited knowledge, but the front legs look too long? Sorry if you find the reflection distracting, I was trying something new.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2010 15:28
|
|
|
axolotl farmer posted:Could be the Green lynx Spider Peucetia viridans  I made that post in a hurry and typed huntsman when I meant green lynx. I too strongly suspect it's a green lynx but again, I can't get over how freaky the legs are in mine. diarrhea for girls posted:Good god, I love that style. It actually looks like a 3d render. I hope you can find all sorts of creepy crawlies to photograph like that. In regards to the ID, I agree with axolotl farmer on it being a Green lynx. I don't see them around here too much, I ran across two or three last year and they're quite cool looking and easy to photograph so I'm hoping to see more this year. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2010 10:02
|
|
|
Jumpers  
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2010 04:03
|
|
|
^^^ I used to rock something like that when I first started shooting macro, but the constant looks and questions I would get started to bother me. Can't deny it actually works though. scottch posted:Holy poo poo, is that webbing? seravid posted:Great shot, MrFrosty. Very clean, good lighting. I'm not usually fond of profiles, but the thread of silk (I hope it's that) changes that, very nice. seravid posted:Didn't know they recognized reflexions (which makes sense considering their excellent vision), I HAVE to try that!  a foolish pianist posted:Has anyone here used the Tamron 90mm 2.8? I'd like to get a decent, cheap-ish macro for knocking around tide pools this summer. For one, the lens doesn't have an internal focusing mechanism, meaning that at 1:1 magnification the lens barrel extends to almost double the length. With your eye behind the viewfinder it is sometimes difficult to get a sense of just how close the end of the barrel is to the subject. Also I don't really like the way you have to slide the focusing ring back and forth to change between AF and MF instead of just flicking a switch, but this is just a matter of personal preference. Still, it is just as sharp as the high-end Nikon/Canon macros at a fraction of the price. A real steal IMO.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2010 05:15
|
|
|
Any idea what kind of magnification you're getting with that setup? I think I would kill for that kind of DOF at f/11.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2010 06:42
|
|
|
One advantage extension tubes on a macro lens have over the basic macro lens is the increase in focal length allows you to get the same magnification from further away. Can be handy for skittish bugs. You lose the ability to focus to infinity focus though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2010 06:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
sirbeefalot posted:I haven't shot any decent macro in ages, but here's one I'm kinda happy with.  * by foogray, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 03:42
|
|
