Pardon my ignorance, but when taking these shots, are you doing it
hand held in the garden, or do you have a fixed setup with tripod,
background, foliage etc?
Is the beastie alive or dead? Live by the look of it.
...
Pardon my ignorance, but when taking these shots, are you doing it
hand held in the garden, or do you have a fixed setup with tripod,
background, foliage etc?
Is the beastie alive or dead? Live by the look of it.
I'm usually in the park out the back of my home. Sometimes I go to the Botanical Gardens some other park. You'd be surprised how many bugs are all around your own garden, you just need to sit down, wait for a minute, then look. They're very much alive and free-range
I find hand-held is the best. Never used a tripod for macro. If you think about it, it's too hard to compose, focus, and keep an insect in a depth of field only millimetres or less deep, especially when the insect is walking around a leaf blowing in the breeze etc. Just practice and technique.
This shot I was lying down on the grass, so the camera is braced by my elbows resting on the ground. Sometimes you can hold the leaf and your lens in your left hand at the same time, keeps the camera and leaf same relative distance and helps keep things in focus. Another tip is to use a broomstick/beanpole/monopod, grip the broomstick and lens with left hand same time so it acts sort of like a monopod, but very quick and easy to adjust height and composition - like this shot of Brian "LordV" Valentine, macro guru.
I find I can do hand-held pretty well for 1:1, maybe 2:1 shots. But any higher magnification than that and you'll need to either be laying down with elbows on ground or the beanpole idea or something.
Very good shot Troy. Good DOF, nice 'n' sharp too.
Jason - I'm like Troy - hand held. It takes a *lot* of practice to get good at macro. My only suggestion is to keep shooting, and shooting, and shooting...you will get better. Eventually.
Troy is spot on with gardens etc - you don't realise how much life is in your gardens until you go and start looking. Do it - you'll be surprised.
Oh yeah, I know there's heaps of critters in the yard, that's why this macro caper really interests me. I think I could spend years just photographing beasties in my own back (and front) yard!
Thanks for the info. Now the new 'L' version with IS is supposedly available, do you reckon it would be worth the premium over the normal 100mm 2.8 macro?
I *know* you could spend years imaging macro in your backyard. Life is varied and ever resilient. The old 100mm f2.8 was a cracking lens, I'd expect the new Canon version to be just as good, if not better. The weather sealing and IS are great additions imho. I'm hoping Canon updates the MPE-65 with IS and weather sealing.
G'day Jason. Not sure about that new IS macro lens. I have the 100mm non-IS version. Personally I'd save the extra money and get the Sigma 105, Tamron 90, or Canon 100 non-IS. I have no experience with the Tokina macro lenses, but am sure something around the same focal length would be good too. Around that 100mm mark gives nice balance of working distance and cost, and with extension tubes you can get higher magnification of 2:1.
I welcome IS on the new 100mm macro lens - it was always a pretty stupid design faux pais from Canon not to have it to be honest. Especially if your using a 1 series body with weather sealing, you'd want integrity of the whole setup. That said, the Sigma and Tamron lenses are very good. I haven't heard much about the Tokina so can't say much.
I'd definitely stick to lenses in that focal length - shorter ones like 50mm/60mm do not give enough working distance imho. Longer ones like Sigmas most excellent 150mm give plenty of working distance but suffer from being bulkier and far heavier, making it more difficult to manage the lens/camera. I actually use a Sigma 150mm and Mark IIn, so my setup is very heavy. It takes a *lot* of practice to get good at it, especially with such a heavy setup. A lot of macro shooters use smaller camera/lens combos - I know LordV uses a 40D and Sigma 105mm or MPE-65, depending on what he's shooting.
another hand held macro shooter here. it just gives me more mobility. my gear goes to 2:1... or 7:1 with a reversed 50mm stacked on the end
i have done some shots 7:1 hand held but i get far to many misses that way.... macro in general takes very steady hands, practice and patience.
No, I wish. It's a no brainer really - Nikon must know that the mpe-65 is a killer lens that gravitates users towards Canon DSLRs for high mag macro shots. Nikon is addressing the issues from most important to least important I feel - with the most important being IQ and more importantly, high ISO performance. For many years, Canon users derided Nikon users over their choices, with high ISO performance being the crux of their arguments. Now that Nikon has kicked Canon's butt big time with the D3 and D700, Canon users are switching to other areas to deride Nikon gear.
Dave
PS I'm a Canon user, but would rather be using Nikon gear these days to be honest. I have my reasons - PM me if you're interested.
Thanks Ving. The MPE-65 is a powerful beast, but takes some getting used to. I've seen some of your macros, here and the DigitalSLR.com.au forum. Love your work and rig.
thanks troy
i dont post to that forum any more, but i hang around ausphotography.net.au (infact i moderate there)... all my latest stuff goes there. my rig is rather cumbersome but over time i have worked out its sweet spots and i get as much as i can out of it
Yeah, shame about digitalslr and the founders pulling out. Looks like some others have taken over the reins, but I don't hang out there much any more either. Seems to have died off a little, and I prefer POTN and here at IIS. Bit clicky at dlsr I thought.
