- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I took this picture of a banded longhorn beetle (Typocerus velutinus) today, sitting on some Queen Anne’s Lace today. Any thoughts?
Canon 7D
105mm
f/14
1/50
Tripod (I think)
Approximately 0.9x life-size magnificationAttachments:
I agree with @Abbie Camuso, Having more beetle in focus would help a bit. Could you explain the thoughts behind the settings you chose, and the factors that called for them? The image does seem correctly exposed. I saw that you shot it @ f/14 and 1/50th sec. To preserve sharpness, I almost never go over f/11. f/8 would be much better. In fact, I probably would have shot it wide open. Your ISO was really high, and if you opened your aperture, you could drop that. Then use the shutter to compensate to get a even exposure.
So, That aside, To get more beetle in focus (like antenna most noticeably) I’m assuming that that was a 24-105mm lens. Try zooming out and moving closer. The more you zoom out though, the less blurred the background will be, but you can compensate for that by getting closer to the subject. I think you will be able to find the correct combination. I would just try to get both the head and antenna in focus, with more or less of the body as long as your background still has some nice bokeh. Have Fun!
@Abbie @thefarmhand I agree. I wish I had gotten some more of this bug in focus. I don’t know if either of you have had the opportunity to work with a 1:1 true macro lens, but I can tell you that depth of field is usually REALLY thin.
thefarmhand, I actually shot this with my Sigma EX DG 105mm f/2.8 macro lens. With magnification being at approx. 0.9x life-size, had I taken this wide open, the depth of field would have been VERY thin – I’ve attached an example of what it might have looked like. IIRC, the attached shot was taken at lower magnification, but the DOF is quite thin – even though it was taken at f/4, not f/2.8. I chose f/14 to combat that. I was shooting with a speedlight as well. Also, for the Canon 7D, the ISO wasn’t all that high for my style of shooting. I regularly shoot at ISO 1000 or higher. Then again, I somewhat like the “grainy” texture that high ISO’s produce, so that could be a matter of aesthetic taste. I picked 1/50 because it was enough to make the exposure somewhat correct, but also quick enough to avoid vibration.
My macro lens only goes to 1:1 magnification, which is standard for true macro lenses. I would love to get the Canon MP-E 65mm, which has 1:1 to 5:1 (variable) magnification; however, sadly, with the price (used) approaching $1000 USD, I can’t afford it at this point. Perhaps someday :). I picked up my current macro lens on Craigslist for $200. When I first got it, I was quite frustrated at it’s finicky nature, especially at high magnification (0.7:1-1:1). I considered reselling it, but I kept it and I am very glad that I did. If you haven’t played with a true macro lens (1:1 life-size ratio or greater), I highly recommend it. Macro lenses can be tricky, but very rewarding!
My best bet to get more of this beetle in focus would have been to move back and take it at lower magnification, perhaps 0.7x or something in that area.
- This reply was modified 54 years, 9 months ago by .
Attachments:
@tjons, So, I guessed the wrong lens… 🙂
Haha, I do have a macro lens, Tamron 90mm f/2.8, and I know that shallow DOF feeling! Like struggling for 10 minutes to get a whole ant in focus… In that case, backing up is definitely the best option. I shoot Nikon, so I’m not sure how many megapixels you’ve got in a 7D, but you could crop it to size later maybe to get your magnification. That’s what I do.
Keep messing with macro, It’s so hard, But entirely worth it.
Just a quick question :
You guys talk about a really thin DOF with macro lenses. Does these lenses can also be good lenses for everyday shooting, or are they just designed for macro? Can macro prime lenses make good landscape shots, for example?BTW, @tjons, that’s an awesome picture!
- This reply was modified 54 years, 9 months ago by .
I would say that it depends on the lens. Most are good for normal shooting as well, although they may have slow AF. My dream Canon MP-E 65 (see link above) and other super-macro (greater than 1:1 magnification) lenses cannot usually be used for normal shooting, although there are some exceptions.
A macro prime lens could take a good landscape shot. Keep in mind that most (not all) macro lenses are at telephoto focal lengths, but you can use telephotos for landscapes as well. You can stop down macro primes just like any other lens that offers the ability to stop down. Many (most?) macro lenses can focus to infinity. If you’re considering getting a macro lens, I highly recommend it. It has opened so many possibilities to me.
Thanks on the compliment! The Lord gave me a really neat opportunity to shoot last night – that’s when I took this.
- This reply was modified 54 years, 9 months ago by .
Having no real experience with macro, I appreciate your posts, @tjons, and everyone’s comments. I learn a lot from you guys and hope to get a macro lens before too long!
@jamesstaddon, Macro’s a lot of fun. I highly recommend it! Macro lenses can be had rather inexpensively as well, so that’s always nice! I will look forward to seeing what you make with it if you get one.
@Jamesstaddon, I second that!!!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.