To all the Technical Experts as well as the Macro Shooters


Status
Not open for further replies.

USM

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
14,982
0
0
Visit site
#1
To all the Technical Experts as well as the Macro Shooters, please advise on the following :

I was in the mid of debating with some friends on the exposure settings on shooting Macro photography. We have heard many people saying that f8 and above should be the correct setting for macro. :think:

However, my friends disagree that even a EF 50mm at f1.8 can shoot fantistic macro. This means that you can even use big aperture like f1.8 for macro? :bigeyes:

I am very interested to see macro photos taken at f1.8, f2, f2.8, f3.5, f5.6 and f6.7 instead of those shot at f8 and above. Anyone who has such a photo, please share with me. :think: Thank you.
 

jbma

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2003
3,287
0
0
Tampines
#3
SHould not be a problem what. I think you get better bokeh at smaller fstop. However you just need to watch the DOF. It all depends on the subject. If it is flat then ok.
 

justarius

Senior Member
Nov 9, 2003
1,226
0
36
Northeast
Visit site
#6
USM said:
To all the Technical Experts as well as the Macro Shooters, please advise on the following :

I was in the mid of debating with some friends on the exposure settings on shooting Macro photography. We have heard many people saying that f8 and above should be the correct setting for macro. :think:

However, my friends disagree that even a EF 50mm at f1.8 can shoot fantistic macro. This means that you can even use big aperture like f1.8 for macro? :bigeyes:

I am very interested to see macro photos taken at f1.8, f2, f2.8, f3.5, f5.6 and f6.7 instead of those shot at f8 and above. Anyone who has such a photo, please share with me. :think: Thank you.
depends on whether you need the DOF. For flower macros, if the flower isn't very 'deep', and your camera is parallel to it, you can get away with big apertures to create a sort of floating look.

if you wait a while I might be able to get some pictures up (i shoot film with limited access to a scanner, ie not mine :D )
 

USM

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
14,982
0
0
Visit site
#7
I guess that we shall limit our discussion on shooting small subjects like dargonfly, housefly, bee, etc.

Macro photography can be a wide scope so some can while some can't. Hence, I am more interested to see photos of insects and not other subjects.
 

USM

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
14,982
0
0
Visit site
#9
Virgo said:
Depending on what effect you're trying to obtain with your shots. Why not?
Do you have insect shots at f1.8 or 2.8? since you mentioned about effect.
 

justarius

Senior Member
Nov 9, 2003
1,226
0
36
Northeast
Visit site
#10
USM said:
I guess that we shall limit our discussion on shooting small subjects like dargonfly, housefly, bee, etc.

Macro photography can be a wide scope so some can while some can't. Hence, I am more interested to see photos of insects and not other subjects.
right, save me the trouble of scanning the things then :blah:
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,785
0
0
Singapore, Bedok
#11
If you have access to one of those DOF calculators, you'd realize that DOF gets very shallow when magnification increases, for any focal length. *Some* macros shots can get away with larger apertures, but you don't want to shoot *every* macro shot with large aperture - sometimes, you just want to see all the detail in that flower or insect. That 'thin DOF' macro is a novelty thing that wears thin (oops) pretty fast.

The other issue is that most of the cheap primes are not very good wide open, and only improves when stopped down significantly.
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,785
0
0
Singapore, Bedok
#12
Take a look at Wai's post on modding the NP-E3 batteries - that's the effect you get when shooting close objects wide open.
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,591
0
0
48
#14
Hor sin?

Aperture f2. Really close to the hor sin. Indonesian hor sin, commando trained, not buay gan like SG ones. :sweat:

http://www.pbase.com/dh77/inbox

PS. They are 100% crops.
 

smallaperture

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2004
2,441
0
0
Catchment Area
#15
I would go all the way down to F16 for macro shots. You gain 2 things - one is the DOF as very few things you shoot is flat like Roti Prata :bsmilie: , after it has cooled down and then heated up again. Even if it's flat, but your optical axis is not square to it, some corners might be a little out of focus. :)

The other thing you benefit is that you get improved sharpness even at the corners, as you might notice even for other shots as well, not restricted to macro. That is why I love Small Apertures. :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,591
0
0
48
#16
smallaperture said:
The other thing you benefit is that you get improved sharpness even at the corners, as you might notice even for other shots as well, not restricted to macro. That is why I love Small Apertures. :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
p&s users like less DOF, you guys all like more DOF. :D

Stuff like C5050 can do macro as close as 3cm!
 

justarius

Senior Member
Nov 9, 2003
1,226
0
36
Northeast
Visit site
#17
2100 said:
p&s users like less DOF, you guys all like more DOF. :D

Stuff like C5050 can do macro as close as 3cm!
which is not necessarily a good thing. Another thing macro shooters also look out for is the working distance. Try shooting a flower at 3cm? ok. Try shooting a housefly at 3cm? maybe not.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom