DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> ? for the flower shooting guru's...
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 34, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/20/2009 11:20:30 AM · #1
Can you take a look at my gear and tell me which of my lenses would have been best suited to shoot my image and how can I get ALL of the flower in focus, not just the tips of parts of it.... I knew it was too soft so I was trying to get it with several different lenses, but it just wasn't coming out right...

So, basically if you were me and you had my gear, which one would you chose and then what AP setting would you start with if you wanted to get more of the flower in sharp focus ???



Thanks for your help...
07/20/2009 11:24:22 AM · #2
IMO you need to open up the aperture almost as far as you can being that close. F22 or higher most likely, that will get much more of the flower in focus...
07/20/2009 11:26:05 AM · #3
You need to close down the lens more. Maybe to f16/22. Though with the micro lens that still might not be enough to get the entire front flower in focus.

Try using the 18-70 at a distance that allows you to get a similar composition. Then close down the lens to get deeper DOF.
07/20/2009 11:26:21 AM · #4
Contrary to popular belief, the choice of lens doesn't really affect DOF in macrophotography. As long as the reproduction ratio is the same, the same aperture will yield the same DOF, more or less.

There are basically two ways to get more DOF in this shot: stop way down (f/22, f/32) and use a longer exposure, or shoot a number variations with the focus point adjusted for each separate exposure, then layer the several images in photoshop and erase whatever is out of focus on each layer. (This is legal in advanced editing). Both solutions pretty much demand that you be shooting in a studio without a breath of air to cause movement in the petals, of course...

R.
07/20/2009 11:26:59 AM · #5
I think you should be able to get the whole image in focus using the lenses you have. Using a higher f-stop (smaller aperture) will give you deeper depth of field - more in focus.. f9 is a nice sweet spot on the lens, but at the distance from the arrangement, you will end up with a lot OOF. \

Your sharpest lens is the 60mm 2.8. I would try some shots at f22 - this will require more light and/ or longer shutter times. If that is the goal, shooting outside with any wind will cause you grief! And you will need to get a bit farther away from the subject to enable you to get more in focus.

If you notice eyewave's shot - he used a 100mm macro prime lens for that and got outstanding results - deep focus throughout.

Good luck!
07/20/2009 11:27:00 AM · #6
Originally posted by dknourek:

IMO you need to open up the aperture almost as far as you can being that close. F22 or higher most likely, that will get much more of the flower in focus...


That'd be "stop down the aperture", Dave, not open it up...

R.
07/20/2009 11:31:16 AM · #7
Don't know how good your lenses are, but I'd think the 28-80 (at 80mm) should do best. As already said, f/22 should work well. The 60mm may be sharper, but you would have to be too close to the flowers.

Message edited by author 2009-07-20 11:32:56.
07/20/2009 11:32:46 AM · #8
Interesting that the choice of lens will not change the DOF. Could you not use a larger lens (like the Sigma 70-300 macro), move further back to get the same framing, and use a slightly larger aperture than most are recommending (circa f10 maybe) since the extra distance between the lens and subject will give you a greater DOF?

That's how I shot this using a Sigma 70-200mm Macro



Incidentally with KK's shot I found the sharpness really difficult to determine with the yellow against the turqoise.

Message edited by author 2009-07-20 11:33:02.
07/20/2009 11:36:27 AM · #9
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Interesting that the choice of lens will not change the DOF. Could you not use a larger lens (like the Sigma 70-300 macro), move further back to get the same framing, and use a slightly larger aperture than most are recommending (circa f10 maybe) since the extra distance between the lens and subject will give you a greater DOF?

That's how I shot this using a Sigma 70-200mm Macro





Very good shot, but you have a depth of field of only about an inch here with your f/10. Not enough for a bunch of lilies.
07/20/2009 11:44:02 AM · #10
True, but with the lens all out at 200mm I was only a couple of feet away. Surely by moving back enough to capture a whole bunch of Lilies you would increase the DoF significantly?

Agreed that my pic was perhaps a poor choice to illustrate - sadly I am at work and some more suitable pics are at home.

I may try playing with a DoF calculator to see what should be possible as I am curious now.

07/20/2009 11:45:25 AM · #11
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Interesting that the choice of lens will not change the DOF. Could you not use a larger lens (like the Sigma 70-300 macro), move further back to get the same framing, and use a slightly larger aperture than most are recommending (circa f10 maybe) since the extra distance between the lens and subject will give you a greater DOF?


Intuitively, that would seem to make sense, but it's not how it works. For a given reproduction ratio, and at a given aperture, DOF is identical regardless of the focal length of the lens. The only advantage to using a longer lens is that you can get the same framing at a greater working distance.

R.

Message edited by author 2009-07-20 11:46:44.
07/20/2009 11:50:26 AM · #12
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Interesting that the choice of lens will not change the DOF. Could you not use a larger lens (like the Sigma 70-300 macro), move further back to get the same framing, and use a slightly larger aperture than most are recommending (circa f10 maybe) since the extra distance between the lens and subject will give you a greater DOF?

Intuitively, that would seem to make sense, but it's not how it works. For a given reproduction ratio, and at a given aperture, DOF is identical regardless of the focal length of the lens. The only advantage to using a longer lens is that you can get the same framing at a greater working distance.

R.

Then why is it said that using a long tele lens will "flatten" an image?
07/20/2009 11:56:21 AM · #13
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by bear_music:


Intuitively, that would seem to make sense, but it's not how it works. For a given reproduction ratio, and at a given aperture, DOF is identical regardless of the focal length of the lens. The only advantage to using a longer lens is that you can get the same framing at a greater working distance.

R.

Then why is it said that using a long tele lens will "flatten" an image?


That's a question of the relationship of objects to each other within the frame, not DOF. Try this: set up your tripod with your longest lens on it and shoot a scene that demonstrates this "flattening" effect. Now switch to your widest lens and snap a shot. Now, in photoshop open both images and CROP the wide shot so it covers the exact same area, the copy/paste it onto the tele shot. They will be indistinguishable, as far as location of objects goes, aside from resolution issues.

If you move in with the wider lens, while shooting, so the reproduction ratio is the same, then the relationship of the objects within the frame will change dramatically, of course... But, at an identical aperture, the DOF would be the same.

R.

Message edited by author 2009-07-20 11:59:21.
07/20/2009 11:59:54 AM · #14
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by bear_music:


Intuitively, that would seem to make sense, but it's not how it works. For a given reproduction ratio, and at a given aperture, DOF is identical regardless of the focal length of the lens. The only advantage to using a longer lens is that you can get the same framing at a greater working distance.

R.

Then why is it said that using a long tele lens will "flatten" an image?

That's a question of the relationship of objects to each other within the frame, not DOF. Try this: set up your tripod with your longest lens on it and shoot a scene that demonstrates this "flattening" effect. Now switch to your widest lens and snap a shot. Now, in photoshop open both images and CROP the wide shot so it covers the exact same area, the copy/paste it onto the tele shot. They will be indistinguishable, as far as location of objects goes, aside from resolution issues.

If you move in with the wider lens, while shooting, so the reproduction ratio is the same, then the relationship of the objects within the frame will change dramatically, of course... But, at an identical aperture, the DOF would be the same.

R.

Interesting. Ok, I'll try that. :-)
07/20/2009 12:28:32 PM · #15
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:


Incidentally with KK's shot I found the sharpness really difficult to determine with the yellow against the turqoise.


LOL... No sir... there was no sharpness.. I actually can't blame the turquoise on that.. :-)
07/20/2009 12:29:39 PM · #16
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

or shoot a number variations with the focus point adjusted for each separate exposure, then layer the several images in photoshop and erase whatever is out of focus on each layer. (This is legal in advanced editing). Both solutions pretty much demand that you be shooting in a studio without a breath of air to cause movement in the petals, of course...

R.


This is interesting you suggest this, because I actually did that and still have the images but chose NOT to do all the post processing work on it as I wasn't sure how legal that is... Thanks for your input..

Message edited by author 2009-07-20 12:32:11.
07/20/2009 12:31:58 PM · #17
Originally posted by bassbone:

I think you should be able to get the whole image in focus using the lenses you have. Using a higher f-stop (smaller aperture) will give you deeper depth of field - more in focus.. f9 is a nice sweet spot on the lens, but at the distance from the arrangement, you will end up with a lot OOF. \

Your sharpest lens is the 60mm 2.8. I would try some shots at f22 - this will require more light and/ or longer shutter times. If that is the goal, shooting outside with any wind will cause you grief! And you will need to get a bit farther away from the subject to enable you to get more in focus.

If you notice eyewave's shot - he used a 100mm macro prime lens for that and got outstanding results - deep focus throughout.

Good luck!


got it.. I was doing this outside.. I do have lights I can set up, at the time I didn't think that would make a difference or "solve the problem" I was facing.. So, this is why I was asking... So glad that I did...

Thank you everyone for your info !! This was really helpfull and I'm off to the flower shop to get more subjects & try again...
07/21/2009 03:41:34 AM · #18
Originally posted by Bear_Music:


The only advantage to using a longer lens is that you can get the same framing at a greater working distance.

R.


That is the bit that I was trying to get at in my clumsy way - I thought that this should be true. As for the rest I take your point completely. So at a given aperture, the greater working distance will give greater DOF.

Although I did try playing with this using an online calculator and you would need to get some 14ft away with a 200mm lens to get about 7 inches of DOF using f10. Not sure how useful that would actually be for this shot.
07/21/2009 04:35:38 AM · #19
try standing further away from the flower
07/21/2009 07:01:15 AM · #20
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The only advantage to using a longer lens is that you can get the same framing at a greater working distance.

Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

So at a given aperture, the greater working distance will give greater DOF.

I dunno the math, or the geometry, but I have found in my case that I get better flower shots by standing back & zooming in....

        

ETA: I am *NOT* a flower shooting guru....I just like to shoot them! LOL!!!

Message edited by author 2009-07-21 07:10:34.
07/21/2009 09:16:02 AM · #21
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:


The only advantage to using a longer lens is that you can get the same framing at a greater working distance.

R.


That is the bit that I was trying to get at in my clumsy way - I thought that this should be true. As for the rest I take your point completely. So at a given aperture, the greater working distance will give greater DOF.


No, this isn't true. If the reproduction ratio is the same (i.e. the framing is the same) then the DOF is the same, regardless of the actual working distance/focal length of the lens, assuming the aperture is the same. In your example (14 foot working distance to get 7 inches of DOF) you'd have a much lower reproduction ratio, say 1:8 instead of 1:1, whatever.

R.
07/21/2009 09:43:36 AM · #22
Now I am confused. That would suggest that (for a zoom lens) the DOF would change as one alters the focal length to change the framing, without altering the aperture.

I don't get how you will get the same DOF using (say) a 50mm at f10 2m from a subject as you will using a 200mm at f10 8m from a subject, although the online DOF calculator tells me that you do (60cm!). Is there somewhere online that I can read up on this?

So the upshot is that wider lenses give proportionally greater DOF for the working distance?

07/21/2009 10:37:15 AM · #23
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Now I am confused. That would suggest that (for a zoom lens) the DOF would change as one alters the focal length to change the framing, without altering the aperture.

I don't get how you will get the same DOF using (say) a 50mm at f10 2m from a subject as you will using a 200mm at f10 8m from a subject, although the online DOF calculator tells me that you do (60cm!). Is there somewhere online that I can read up on this?

So the upshot is that wider lenses give proportionally greater DOF for the working distance?


At the same working distance and at the same aperture, the wider lens has more DOF than the longer lens, yes. At the same reproduction ratio (i.e. wider lens closer to subject) this is not true, DOF is the same.

Here's a link, scroll way down for DOF issues: //xoomer.virgilio.it/ripolini/Introduction%20to%20closeup.htm

R.
07/22/2009 09:18:26 AM · #24
I am curious about the reply by Bear Music and the link to xoomer.virgilio, etc. I opened that like and it was greek to me. Can you explain it in more simple terms. I have a Canon 5D and a 28-105, f/4, a 20mm f/2.8 and a 100 macro. Always had a problem with DOF until someone said to stop down as far as I can and focus on a point 1/3 of the distance from the subject and the camera. I tried that yesterday and seemed to work.
07/22/2009 10:15:40 AM · #25
Originally posted by mercitrois:

I am curious about the reply by Bear Music and the link to xoomer.virgilio, etc. I opened that like and it was greek to me. Can you explain it in more simple terms. I have a Canon 5D and a 28-105, f/4, a 20mm f/2.8 and a 100 macro. Always had a problem with DOF until someone said to stop down as far as I can and focus on a point 1/3 of the distance from the subject and the camera. I tried that yesterday and seemed to work.


OK, I made a quick schematic drawing:

Point A is in focus.
Point B is not. The light rays do not converge on what should be a point. Therefore the point is blurred. The further B is away from A, the larger the blurred patch will become. By closing the diaphragm, you reduce the width of the light bundle, therefore the blurred patch becomes smaller.

Now to what Bear_Music said. In order to obtain the picture of the short lense, I took the picture of the long lense and compressed it horizontally. By doing that yourself you can understand why the DOF is the same in both cases.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 11:32:15 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 11:32:15 AM EDT.