In reply to Post #2373
I've not come across a way of avoiding the specular reflections from a ring light. The benefit of them is the even spread of the light because of the proximity of the source to the lens. For a more diffuse source the light has to be larger and would be blocked by the camera, lens and photographer. A longer focal length helps with lighting as you get more space. Maybe one of those little soft boxes you can get rigged up on a bracket close to the lens might work as a more natural looking reflection. I can't think of a way that isn't going to add bulk though.
I've not come across a way of avoiding the specular reflections from a ring light. The benefit of them is the even spread of the light because of the proximity of the source to the lens. For a more diffuse source the light has to be larger and would be blocked by the camera, lens and photographer. A longer focal length helps with lighting as you get more space. Maybe one of those little soft boxes you can get rigged up on a bracket close to the lens might work as a more natural looking reflection. I can't think of a way that isn't going to add bulk though.
In reply to Post #2375
No - me neither. The nearest I came to an idea was those soft silver foil/white reflectors on a wire frame that you can bend about.
If you could somehow mount that and bounce a top-mounted flash off it. Not much weight but still just too bulky.
What about a high CRI torch mounted?
That at least gets around the problem of the flash not keeping up with the burst rate!
I'm never going to get the sort of quality that you see with an MPE65, Cross polarisation and a dead or frozen subject though, so It's more about getting the most out of natural light and accepting the limitations of that.
I'm happy with what I'm getting at the moment anyway.
No - me neither. The nearest I came to an idea was those soft silver foil/white reflectors on a wire frame that you can bend about.
If you could somehow mount that and bounce a top-mounted flash off it. Not much weight but still just too bulky.
What about a high CRI torch mounted?
That at least gets around the problem of the flash not keeping up with the burst rate!
I'm never going to get the sort of quality that you see with an MPE65, Cross polarisation and a dead or frozen subject though, so It's more about getting the most out of natural light and accepting the limitations of that.
I'm happy with what I'm getting at the moment anyway.
In reply to Post #2376
I've found the humble pringles tube to be as good as anything, even comes with its own diffuser and the snacks to keep you going
I've found the humble pringles tube to be as good as anything, even comes with its own diffuser and the snacks to keep you going
In reply to Post #2377
Salted!
I think flash is just not the thing for me. The time it takes to recharge is too long between shots to expect most subjects to remain motionless. At 10 frames per second without flash I've a much better chance of some stackable images.
Adding flash might allow a touch more DOF but nowhere near enough to warrant the expense of the frame rate.
Salted!
I think flash is just not the thing for me. The time it takes to recharge is too long between shots to expect most subjects to remain motionless. At 10 frames per second without flash I've a much better chance of some stackable images.
Adding flash might allow a touch more DOF but nowhere near enough to warrant the expense of the frame rate.
In reply to Post #2378
I haven't used it for macro but for some fast karate sequences I was using 4 flashes in two groups firing alternately, it halved recycle times but is still wasn't quick enough, a little hack that worked for short bursts was to set the flash on full, let it charge then drop to say 1/32, you won't get 32 shots out of it but you should get at least half a dozen shots at low sequential speed.
Give it plenty of time to cool between bursts!
Continuous lights have a problem of their own in the pulse frequency, if you want consistent exposures you have to drop the shutter speed too low. Low energy lights indoors I'll be at around 1/20th. I have some video lights that are OK to around 1/80th but I will get a slight variation
I haven't used it for macro but for some fast karate sequences I was using 4 flashes in two groups firing alternately, it halved recycle times but is still wasn't quick enough, a little hack that worked for short bursts was to set the flash on full, let it charge then drop to say 1/32, you won't get 32 shots out of it but you should get at least half a dozen shots at low sequential speed.
Give it plenty of time to cool between bursts!
Continuous lights have a problem of their own in the pulse frequency, if you want consistent exposures you have to drop the shutter speed too low. Low energy lights indoors I'll be at around 1/20th. I have some video lights that are OK to around 1/80th but I will get a slight variation
In reply to Post #2379
1/32 what sorry?
Flash power?
1/32 what sorry?
Flash power?
In reply to Post #2380
Sorry, yes I was thinking manual, I don't think ttl would work for a burst
If the flash is charged for a full power burst, you should get a few shots on lower power before it has to recharge
Sorry, yes I was thinking manual, I don't think ttl would work for a burst
If the flash is charged for a full power burst, you should get a few shots on lower power before it has to recharge
In reply to Post #2381
Always manual with macro
Always manual with macro
In reply to Post #2381
That could be a little game-changer
Just had a play and at 1/32 I can get 7 shots at either burst rate
Better still is 1/16 - 5 shots quite a light difference too!
At 1/8 I can only get 3.
Thanks for that tip - that wouldn't have occurred to me at all
That could be a little game-changer
Just had a play and at 1/32 I can get 7 shots at either burst rate
Better still is 1/16 - 5 shots quite a light difference too!
At 1/8 I can only get 3.
Thanks for that tip - that wouldn't have occurred to me at all
In reply to Post #2383
Let it cool, i had two taped together in a metal beauty dish with no airflow, they didn't like it
Let it cool, i had two taped together in a metal beauty dish with no airflow, they didn't like it
In reply to Post #2358
Regarding light loss with extension tubes I found this.
"On the other hand, light loss caused by extension tubes is inversely proportional to the focal length of the original lens. For example, a 25mm tube results in a 1 stop loss on a 50mm lens, but only a half stop loss on a 100mm lens, or a quarter stop loss on a 200mm lens."
From here http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/closeup2.htm
So maybe less of an issue at 180 with a 25mm tube.
Regarding light loss with extension tubes I found this.
"On the other hand, light loss caused by extension tubes is inversely proportional to the focal length of the original lens. For example, a 25mm tube results in a 1 stop loss on a 50mm lens, but only a half stop loss on a 100mm lens, or a quarter stop loss on a 200mm lens."
From here http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/closeup2.htm
So maybe less of an issue at 180 with a 25mm tube.
In reply to Post #2385
Interesting article
I'd say the difference in magnification probably follows the same pattern. I didn't notice any mention of sharpness or diffraction in that Q&A,how times have changed
I'm still not sure how much difference 25mm tube will make, the impact on my tele lenses is marginal
I avoid this site but the first few comments seem relevant
link
Interesting article
I'd say the difference in magnification probably follows the same pattern. I didn't notice any mention of sharpness or diffraction in that Q&A,how times have changed
I'm still not sure how much difference 25mm tube will make, the impact on my tele lenses is marginal
I avoid this site but the first few comments seem relevant
link
In reply to Post #2386
Good find - he actually has exactly the same lens and body choices as me!
Officially the gain in magnification is about 20% with a 25mm tube
Interestingly it looks like my failed TC experiment may be back on again though, apparently AF is available at f8 and below, I think I left it at 9 or 10 yesterday when trying it.
Good find - he actually has exactly the same lens and body choices as me!
Officially the gain in magnification is about 20% with a 25mm tube
Interestingly it looks like my failed TC experiment may be back on again though, apparently AF is available at f8 and below, I think I left it at 9 or 10 yesterday when trying it.
In reply to Post #2387
I had to check the name
I actually read this whole thread yesterday, it's a shame so many pics are missing but there are some amazing macro shots going back a bit
I had to check the name
I actually read this whole thread yesterday, it's a shame so many pics are missing but there are some amazing macro shots going back a bit
In reply to Post #2388
Used to be quite a popular thread.
Carp angling seems to attract less "countrymen" and more "screenies" these days.
The gadget threads seem to get plenty of traffic!
Used to be quite a popular thread.
Carp angling seems to attract less "countrymen" and more "screenies" these days.
The gadget threads seem to get plenty of traffic!