|
|
|
|
 #2355 12 Apr 2020 at 6.16pm | |   |
|
In reply to Post #2354
Didn't get long in the garden myself, clouded over quick and then rain.
That adaptor's quite impressive but I think to be honest the macro lens with tube has better quality, although you said you're losing light that way.
I'm going to a try a tube first anyway as it's cheaper, and my 180 prime is a bit of a belter.
Last night's refrigerated Zebra Jumper got his own back this morning - little bathtub was all over the place straight away - not a single usable frame!
Caught a couple more with slightly better results, but the best was the only Fleecy Jumper I found.
Half the length of an ant!
Sat nicely for 3 stacks worth - composite image below 
All went back on the brickwork unharmed afterwards 
(Click for bigger)
|
|
|
|
|
#2354 12 Apr 2020 at 1.48pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2353
Having to give the garden a wide berth today, kid next door coughing something chronic!
So I had a play with some flash gels. Won't be any good to compare sharpness but it does show a difference in magnification and exposure
Today's subject
Here it is with my macro lens at mfd, 1:1 magnification. This will already be closer than you get just through the smaller sensor
But we can get closer still, using 26mm of extension tubes.
Note all images are at f8, flash power and distance doesn't change either
Another option are the excellent raynox adaptors, not to be compared to those cheap diopter, this is using the raynox 250, there are more or less powerful models
We can also use both
... 
That first circle is less than a mm 
I think I'm gonna order the raynox 150, I think stacking both will give me better results than using tubes. They don't seem to have the same light penalty, and will turn any of my lenses into macros, where the tubes only really work with standard to wide primes
I've got dozens of DIY modifiers for macro light diffusion, I'm going to have to knock up some mini snoots, I wanted more contrast than this
|
|
|
|
|
#2353 11 Apr 2020 at 7.54pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2352
That would be great Paul, I did do a few but got really fed up with ps when trying to stack some astro images, I don't think I've used it in a year, light room does most of what I want.
I haven't noticed it before but my tubes seem to be robbing me of a lot of contrast and some sharpness, not sure if it's a light leak or some internal reflections but it hasn't always done that.
Tubes are a great cheap way to get closer, I'm finding the raynox adaptor previously mentioned costs a lot less in terms of light, contrast and sharpness, I think they're about £60
I've set the camera up for star trails now but I'll do a comparison tomorrw
|
|
|
|
|
#2352 11 Apr 2020 at 6.51pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2351
Photoshop is what I'm using, happy to do a quick guide via PM if it helps?
Going to have to get an extension tube to get closer.
|
|
|
|
|
#2351 11 Apr 2020 at 6.16pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2350
Seeing the outline of my head in the eye highlight I want to try it with a flash fired on my face
My camera does it well but it only takes a tiny movement and it will fail, its been like a yoga workout today getting into positions where I can hold it steady. I have a few worth editing from today, I might see whether the photos hop focus stack is easier than last time I tried.
Also had a go with the high res mode, a few frames were slightly missing focus but the frames may stack, would be great if they do, I'm always amazed at the detail when high res works
|
|
|
|
|
#2350 11 Apr 2020 at 5.56pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2349
Found one! Couldn't catch it, it was deep in the Rosemary so shot it in situ.
After a little think I'd decided to go back to the 1D4 because I wasn't seeing any noticeable improvement in quality with the 5D3 and it only shoots 6fps.
1D4 does 10 fps and of course a little more reach which is always welcome.
Just took this - a 22 shot, and hand-held, focus stack.
Shocked at how well it's come out with such an unscientific way of shooting. 
Same as yours really, for an in-camera algorithm that's pretty stonking.
(Click for bigger)
|
|
|
|
|
#2349 11 Apr 2020 at 5.43pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2348
I'm glad to finally know what the bee fly is called, I get loads in my garden and never knew whether they sting
I wasn't looking for one but this managed to meet a sticky end under my drink! (click)
Stacked in camera
|
|
|
|
|
#2348 11 Apr 2020 at 3.35pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2347
Can't find one now!
Today's bests...
(Click for bigger)
Wolf Spider - stack of 5
Bee Fly
Sand Wasp (I think) covered in pollen
Shield Bug (stack of 9)
|
|
|
|
|
#2347 11 Apr 2020 at 12.17pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2346
Jumpers look so cute up close
The stacking can do better than I've shown here, I had it set a bit too narrow by the look of them. It's also jpeg only but with the single raw frames if you want to go to the next level.
I did mean to do some composite star trails last night but a couple of ciders in the sunshine went right to my head
|
|
|
|
|
#2346 11 Apr 2020 at 11.56am | | |
|
In reply to Post #2345
Thanks for the tip 
I have the same thing with wanting to fill the frame at the expense of focus! Of course backing off a little also increases your DOF so win-win. There's always a fair degree of luck involved with anything live.
That's pretty impressive in-camera stacking mate.
Going to try to catch a Zebra Jumping Spider today and chill it a little in the fridge...
|
|
|
|
|
#2345 11 Apr 2020 at 9.30am | | |
|
In reply to Post #2344
Squashed slugs seem to get their attention
I can't seem to resist getting closer and closer, that ant and greenfly shot is the full frame and the long end is about 6mm, using an olympus 60mm macro, extension tubes and a raynox dcr-250 adaptor. The tubes seem to cost 2to3 stops of light and at that magnification any aperture below f11 will need stacking. Because of the speed the ants go at, using flash it takes an awful lot of luck to get one in focus. I could do with a couple of 100w bulbs
It's a lot easier when you back off a bit
This is a straight out of camera stack (click)
Would be better with a bit of work but just wanted to show what the camera will give you when you can't be arsed to edit
|
|
|
|
|
#2344 10 Apr 2020 at 8.27pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2343
I tried little piles of sugar around the patio as bait but they're not interested!
Saw that Septimus had one "on the mat" so grabbed the tripod - this one is a stack of 5 shots.
First time I've done more than 3, pretty pleased how it came out.
(Used full frame body today, yesterdays were 1.3 crop)
(Click for bigger)
|
|
|
|
|
#2343 10 Apr 2020 at 1.17pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2342
I struggle with anything live but olympus cameras do focus stacking in camera. It works well with flowers as you can use the sharpest aperture and the camera stacks 10 shots. It will also focus bracket up to 99 shots but that's too much processing for me
I couldn't be chasing around trying to focus, I found the most popular path set the focus and spray and pray when one was in the area
I'll have to set up some better lighting, even in late afternoon sunlight with a reflector and a rhino beam I didn't have enough light for proper close macro
|
|
|
|
|
#2342 10 Apr 2020 at 12.43pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2341
Imagine if they were the same size as us! Terrifying.
You did better than me - they move too fast for me to get anywhere near a focus - gave up in the end.
I'm using a 180mm 3.5 which has a MFD of 0.48 metres.
Mostly at f8 or f10, hand held and no flash.
If I go any higher on the f-stop I start losing quality.
The Shield Bug is actually focus stacked from 2 shots.
I didn't think I could get into focus stacking by shooting hand held, but I've found if you "machine-gun" once you obtain focus there are usually enough variations in focus to pick one or two or even 3 shots to stack.
On a tripod you would deliberately alter the focus very slightly as you shoot to get the range, but hand-held, forget it!
Obviously you need a static target as well, which rules out ants.
|
|
|
|
|
#2341 10 Apr 2020 at 12.23pm | | |
|
In reply to Post #2338
Very nice 
I planted some lavender hoping to get some pics of the beetles but after both kids got stung by bees I had to get rid 
I stuck a macro adaptor on my long zoom, 300mm on a 2x crop body, ants are bloody scary lookin up close 
Not nearly good enough to share but interesting to see how close you can get with these adaptors, not very practical with about a microns depth of field at f14
|
|
