Macro - What am I missing? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

10/29/2005 04:27:37 PM · #1

Hello,

Ok...this is an edit...here is another shot

Made this morning. See image for details.
NO PS yet. Need more advice on Macros!

Here's another from today.

Thanks,

KS

Message edited by author 2005-10-30 16:17:56.

Falc

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

10/29/2005 04:31:36 PM · #2

Need a little more info - tell us what the apperture and exposure was for this particular shot, and any other examples.

If you have one at f22 then post that example with details.

eqsite

Nikon D7100

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

10/29/2005 04:33:20 PM · #3

Ken, I'm certainly no macro expert -- I'm just getting started myself, so take this with that in mind. It seems like your point of focus is just a little in front of where you want it to be. The depth of field in macro shots can be extremely small, so getting the focus just right is challening. Because of this, I typically use as small an aperature as I can given the subject and lighting and then take a bunch of shots varying the focal point slightly. It's kind of a trial and error approach and involves a little bit of luck. Hopefully someone with some more experience can offer some additional advice as well.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

10/29/2005 04:39:40 PM · #4

If you think of a particular DOF as a loaf of bread and the focal plane as cutting that bread in half, there is usually less loaf in front of the plane than behind. This is no more true than when you are using the very minimum focal distance of the lens (which we all tend to do when we do macro because we want that fly as big as possible). Try backing up even an inch or two.

As mentioned, that DOF can be very thin on macro, use as high an apeture as possible and as as mentioned focus either in the center (depthwise) or just on this side of center.

smilebig4me1x

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

10/29/2005 04:40:39 PM · #5

It looks to me like it might have focused on the outter wing tip rather than the eyes of the fly which i think is where the focus needs to be. I have done ALOT of macro work and I know how hard it is to get the focus exactly where it needs to be. Try going into manual focus. my camera does a sorta zoom in feature in macro mode and manual focus so i can see where the focus is going. I am not a bit familar with your camer or lens so i dont know if yurs does this or not. hope i have helped a bit :o)

fixedintime

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II for Canon

10/29/2005 04:44:58 PM · #6

Ken, Im with eqsite and Falc on this. To me it looks like the focus on his right rear leg and his wing and you don't have much DOF. DOF gets worst the closer you get and the wider the apperture you use.

I would start with apperture priority on this and set it at the highest f number you can. You will have to accept whatever shutter speed you end up with so set the camera on a tripod and hope the guy does not move. A cable release might be useful to steady the camera and you might even want to lock the mirror up to prevent camera shake as well.

gaurawa

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

10/29/2005 04:50:24 PM · #7

As mentioned above, the focus is off and small depth of field makes the eyes blurry.
I would suggest using manual focus for macro ( this is what I have always used ). One thing that I find useful is fix your focus distance (in this case the nearest the lens can focus) and then move your camera to get the fly in focus, move it back and forth and keep clicking...

10/29/2005 04:51:45 PM · #8

Yep, small aperture (try f/16), manual focus, and use supplementary lighting (diffused flash) to keep shutter speed up. Set the focus to obtain the magnification you want, and leave it set. Move the camera to get the focus plane where you want it.

10/29/2005 05:16:31 PM · #9

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

To be precise: at any given focal distance, the DOF is divided as follows: 1/3 in front of the point-of-focus, and 2/3 behind it. This is true for all photography, not just macros. If you are focused at 12 inches and your DOF is 3 inches, your zone of acceptable sharpness will be from 11 inches to 14 inches. If you are focused at 60 feet and your DOF is 90 feet, your zone of acceptable sharpness will be from 30 feet to 120 feet.

Robt.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

10/29/2005 05:48:11 PM · #10

Originally posted by bear_music:

What you didn't like my bread analogy? Correct me if I'm wrong about this, but if your minimum focus distance on a lens is, say, 7 inches and your focal plane is 7 inches away, all your acceptable sharpness is at 7+ inches and you effectively cut your DOF by 1/3rd (losing all the DOF in front of the focal plane). This was the purpose of my advice to scoot back. I'm not positive about this though...

10/29/2005 07:46:03 PM · #11

Thanks everyone for your help. I will setup tomorrow in bright sun with app at 14+ and see what happens. I'll use all the focus techniques listed above and see what happens.

I'll post some for comments tomorrow.

Thanks...

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

10/29/2005 10:22:43 PM · #12

Of course it could just be user error...

10/29/2005 11:07:10 PM · #13

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Not quite... if the minimum focus distance is 7 inches, that means the plane of focus is 7 inches from the sensor plane, and there is still DoF both in front of and behind the plane of focus. The minimum focus distance figure just defines how close the exact plane of focus can be.

10/29/2005 11:12:26 PM · #14

So...in English...lets say at F22 or so...and I'm taking a shot of a 12" ruler and my target is the Number 6. I'm staring down longways at #1...where do I aim the center of the viewfinder? Directly at 6?

KS

10/29/2005 11:17:40 PM · #15

Originally posted by kenskid:

Yes, in nearly all situations, you don't want to second guess, if you're on AF, put the focus point where you want focus to be and fire. If manually focusing, let you vision expand to cover a wide area and watch where the center of the sharpest-appearing area lies. Put that on the plane you want in best focus.
For macro work, set the magnification using the focus ring, and move the camera to put the focus plane where it needs to be.

10/29/2005 11:23:08 PM · #16

I can't wait til tomorrow to shoot MACRO... with all the tips, I should come home with some GREAT shots ... ;-)

10/30/2005 10:32:48 AM · #17

bump...see top post please.

10/30/2005 10:46:03 AM · #18

Is that pretty much the full frame or have you cropped significantly? It looks like the plane of focus is precisely at the surface of the leaf at the point where the bug's head protrudes. That might put it a little behind the "face". I don't see any signs of camera shake at all, but that might be due to the small size of the web image. At any rate, there's no *gross* shake goin' on. The lighting is harsh, which is causing shadow detail to be lost in some areas.
BTW, What was your shutter speed?

10/30/2005 10:48:17 AM · #19

Originally posted by kirbic:

Says on image notes f/19 @ 1/180

R.

10/30/2005 11:30:51 AM · #20

Very little crop. Shutter is 180 at F19 on a 60mm lens (90mm eq)

I just can't seem the get that kick ass detail I see on many macro shots...

Keep advice coming!

Skid

Originally posted by kirbic:

10/30/2005 11:32:25 AM · #21

That kick-ass detail you're referring to is usually a function of lighting...

Robt.

10/30/2005 11:51:37 AM · #22

I learn again! So if I'm outside in the sun...what should I do?

Originally posted by bear_music:

That kick-ass detail you're referring to is usually a function of lighting...

Robt.

10/30/2005 11:58:02 AM · #23

Originally posted by kenskid:

I learn again! So if I'm outside in the sun...what should I do?

Originally posted by bear_music:
That kick-ass detail you're referring to is usually a function of lighting...

Robt.

Choose a "good" orientation to the light. Use full-in flash, possibly, for reflections etc, but that's REALLY difficult if not impossible with on-camera flash. Use reflectors. Use a scrim between the sun and the subject.

When you have leaves/petals in the image, backlighting is often a good way to bring up delciacy and details.

I'm not expert at bugs, though. Jacko could help, he's death on bugs. I do "still life macros", and those are easier to deal with lighting-wise. You might consider doing a bunch of macros without live subjects to nail down the focusing and lighting issues, then apply what you've learned to shooting bugs, which are an order of magnitude more difficult because they don't stay put.

R.

10/30/2005 04:19:12 PM · #24

Hello,

Here is one more from today. 1/500 F13