Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Biweekly Shoot Out

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 27, 2012, 5:13 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,584
Default

Thats weird. The second picture was gone. I went to fix it and it was still gone. Then it reappeared with both pics again. It seems to be fixed now.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2012, 6:28 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Yes, now I see both. Great macros!
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2012, 8:16 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

Hi Bynx

Great photos! I like both of them. Impressed at the sharpness, but especially at the depth of field. Does reversing the lens somehow allow you to stop down - or give one a lot of depth of field? (I'd have thought not - as I thought it was a property of physics).

Or did you a) stop down a LOT or b) use focus stacking technique? When I take such close macros (eg with my Canon 100mm macro lens) - even if I stop down to eg f13, the depth of field (dof) is still quite small.

A while ago I took some photos of my strawberry flowers - and captured an ant walking on it / polinating it... which made for an interesting 'addition' to the photo. Your compositions are probably superior to mine though (as mine were more 'face on' / flat - due to the dof).

Thanks for sharing!

PS.. .shame to hear about your triple bypass! Phew... hopefully the 'strawberries with whipped cream' in moderation won't cause further health issues.....
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 1, 2012, 11:11 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,584
Default

Hi PJ. The shots were taken with a 28-300mm reversed lens. Everything works in reverse when you do that. At 300mm you can be 3 feet away from subject. At 28mm you can be an inch away. I focus at f5.6, then I shut down to f22 for the shot. It gives me good depth of field. I also had a 2X teleconverter attached. Im still screwing around with the different lenses and teleconverter and stepdown ring combinations to see what works best. So far its the 28-300mm by far.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2012, 12:37 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

Cool... thanks for the explanation Bynx.

I've seen (and heard of) people using lenses reversed to great effect. But I didn't realise about the difference of focal length on minimum focal distance (MFD) / focus possibility. Wow, one inch away is great!

Perhaps the 2X teleconverter affects that as well (giving you something like f/44 equivalent if you've 'shot' at f/22?) So you focus at f/5.6 so it can lock focus (or you can see what you're doing?)

I expect you used a tripod (or some other form of support)?

Again well done. The colours and composition are great on both. The shot is not quite 'tack sharp' -but they're not terribly soft either.

Cheers, mate

Paul
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:27 AM.