Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 4, 2012, 5:43 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
kazuya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
A flash lets you use a smaller aperture without using a long shutter speed, but a small aperture will only take you so far.
i dont get you, smaller aperture = greater dof isnt that what the op is after here?
reguardless of wether hes shooting "proper" macro or just close up.
kazuya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2012, 6:16 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kazuya View Post
i dont get you, smaller aperture = greater dof isnt that what the op is after here?
reguardless of wether hes shooting "proper" macro or just close up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
With Quadna71's kit, at the minimum focus distance of 35cm, the longest focal length, and an aperture of f/2.8, the total DoF is less than 4mm. At f/16, it's more than 20mm, but that's still less than an inch.
A 20mm DoF is better than a 4mm DoF, but it's still just 20mm.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2012, 10:43 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

A 55mm lens and some extension tubes can make for an excellent macro setup.
They are much cheaper than a dedicated macro lens.
I don't know if they will work with an ef-s lens though, they will work with the relatively inexpensive EF 50 f/1.8 lens.


However no matter what lens you use, you will suffer the effects of shallow DOF as you approach life-size and bigger.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadna71 View Post
Seeing that my longest lens is 55mm,
__________________
A smartphone is all the "camera" you really need.

Last edited by PeterP; Mar 4, 2012 at 10:50 PM.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2012, 10:58 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

50 1.8 with a canon 250D lens also works well. There is allot of options for macro. But I still fine a true macro lens the best and simplest option.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2012, 2:53 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

There are lots of options for macrophotography, but the only way to avoid the problem of a shallow DoF is to use a lens with a longer focal length.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2012, 8:53 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
kazuya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,006
Default

and a flash
kazuya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2012, 9:19 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

... yeah, and a flash.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2012, 9:32 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

I'm using a 150mm f/2.8 macro
at 1:1 (about 16 inches sensor to subject) and @ f/16
I get a whopping 0.43cm dof (about 10mm) with a 5dmkii
that changes to 0.27cm dof (about 6mm) with a 7d crop sensor.

It about doubles at f/32 but that is way past the diffraction limit for those sensors and greatly degrades the image quality.

Even with a longer true macro lens you are still getting squat for dof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
There are lots of options for macrophotography, but the only way to avoid the problem of a shallow DoF is to use a lens with a longer focal length.
__________________
A smartphone is all the "camera" you really need.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2012, 2:42 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia, New South Wales central coast
Posts: 2,891
Default

G'day Q71

See what happens when you ask questions ~ lots of helpful people come to your aid

One of the basic laws of optics [when talking DoF and comparing two lenses] says "when the image size is the same, the DoF is the same"

ie- a 50mm macro lens vs a 150mm macro lens ... the 50mm lens needs to get in much closer than the other lens to achieve the same image size, but when it does, the DoF is the same as the longer macro lens

The 'however' comes in IQ ... say both lenses are set to f22:- as the aperture is a fraction of the focal length, the smaller the focal length, the smaller the physical diameter of the aperture opening leading to more noticable diffraction from the smaller focal length lens. The 'but' now comes in as 'but you might never see this - it depends upon what size you enlarge the image to view or print'.

[many years ago I was part of a team of 'togs illustrating a book on Australian native orchids. Most of the team used 55mm micro-nikkor lenses and the resulting images printed full-page showed no signs of poor IQ]

It seems to me that you are very similar to most of us 'togs ... every bit of camera/lens kit has to pay-its-way and do double duty as an everyday item as well as [in this case] macro stuff. -IF- you are going to make $$$ from your photograhy, then buy dedicated equipment: if not, then double-duty it is

I do not know what lenses you have at the moment, but presuming 'not many', I would suggest you consider something like a 50-200 or thereabouts + some automatic extension tubes [about $200] and a focussing rail [$25] and enjoy the results

As another above has mentioned, flash in dull light will help bump up the exposures, but it will take a fair bit of experimentation to get it right ... many flowers' petals have a shine to them, so the flash often needs to be muted and softened a bit for best results

Back to you
Regards, Phil
__________________
Has Fuji & Lumix superzoom cameras and loves their amazing capabilities
Spends 8-9 months each year travelling Australia
Recent images at http://www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/
Ozzie_Traveller 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 5:02 PM.