So lately I've become a pinch infatuated with shooting flowers - both blooming and withering. I uploaded a few to Flickr and last night, someone commented on one basically giving me a brief tutorial on macro photography (btw I asked for help - he didn't just show up out of the blue and start criticizing it). It baffled me though - he said to set the aperture at f/16, at least. Whaaaaaaaat? I've been using f/2 and even then, the exposure is usually around 1/30 or so. How does that even work though - for those of you who do take a lot of insect shots and such - you actually have a tripod with you to do that? Or am I missing something here?
Essentially, what I did was use my 18-55 on the body and then out of curiosity, I held my 50mm in front of it.
well i guess having a bigger or smaller aperture depends on what effect you are going for, but yeah i would always keep it as low as possible for macro =\
The reason why they say to keep a high f-number is because on macro, the DOF is so shallow. If you used f2 half of the bug will be out of focus. But like Tom said, it depends on what you are trying to achieve.
There is a guy on here....@wahyusp who has PHENOMENAL macro shots. Look at his album......HE IS THE GUY YOU WANT TO TALK TOO. His photos should be in a book at a bookstore!!
The reason for the f/16 is if you wanted to get all of those stamen in focus versus one in focus. The only way they could all be in focus if you had an f/2 set is if they were all on a level field of view, meaning all the same distance away from your camera.
I usually shoot at about f/8 if I want more of my subject to be in focus.
I usually use a tripod because it's so hard to get a crisp and clear. You can see some of my macro shots on my project.
because of heavy hands, along with my tripod, I also use a remote to avoid camera shake. the remote I just recently acquired, before that, it was the 2 second delay option. that tiny little shift my camera made when releasing the shutter button caused quite a blur... my tripod is quite old, cheap and not as stable as it should be.
Most of the macro photographers use flash lighting and narrow apertures. Two off camera flash heads and diffusers is best for more even lighting, a tripod is not necessaryif most of the exposure is flash derived. You can use ND filters to produce countershading of the the subject for more 3d emphasis, a ring flash or diffused flashes set close to the front of the lens will make a flat image. Bright sunlight and a tripod will suffice for most outdoor exposures, wind blows for macro photos. :) Using narrower the f/11-13 is usually beyond the resolving power of most lenses, diffraction effects around the diaphragm edges degrade the image. There is a god boom on macro photography by John Shaw, check amazon. Cheers!
Another tip for the camera shake is to take a few consecutive shots once you press the shutter. I find the second or third (or beyond) shots often are clearer. This works for low light shots as well.
@mattyb , thks, MattyB for the compliment... i'm not that good ... still learning macro-photo... :)
anyway... i tried this method once.. not long ago.
i taped my 50mm at front of 55-250mm. DoF really thin, if not mistaken that photo @f/25, and still not enough to cover the ants body. IMO, tripod is a must, better with speedlite/flash. After hundreds shots, above is the best i can get.
yeah, with this methods, the magnification level significantly raised. @200mm zoom, this combo will gives around 4x life size (200mm/50mm), but this method also makes:
- DoF really thin, as i mention above,
- dark view finder, meaning difficult to make accurate focus
- vignetting
- working distance.... really short, is useless to capture some active bugs.
- slightly increase chromatic aberration
other option for macro is extension tubes, it's easier to handle.
Thank you SO much! I need to try this more. I also used close-up rings for some of the other shots (without flash) and most came out so blurry that I was tempted to smash my camera against a wall that day :)
Annie, don't throw your camera against a wall!!! lol. You will get a lot of blurry macro shots even when you're really good. Keep trying. I love macro and I'm working on getting better.
The macro extenders are great but are not like having a true macro lens. However, I have a true macro 100mm and a 24-70mm - I get great shots from my 70mm which is not a true macro but gives me awesome light and bokeh.
I think it's personal taste. I do sometimes like it all to be in focus. However, like your posted picture I love having one perfect flower (or whatever) standing out. I think your picture is awesome - but obviously not to everyone's taste.
you've heard from some experts, but i'm gonna chime in anyway. i have been so awed by the beautiful macros i've seen on here, and i learned a lot by checking out their EXIF and then trying it out myself. i learned that i need a much smaller aperture than i thought (like others mentioned, i wanted more of my subject to be in focus). so, instead of f/2.8, i now try f/5 or f/7. but it also depends on your focal length. the other big learning i had is that unless you shoot with a tripod (and flash) -- which i don't -- a fast shutter speed really helps keep your images sharp. i'm no expert, but i thought that my recent learnings might be useful to you =)
@ wahyu - I am now following you :-) Your pictures are amazing and inspiring. Except for the speedlight I have the same equipment but I don't come close to your shots - yet!!! I think I'm doing ok and if I keep practicing I hope by the end of the year I see a huge improvement.
Macros I believe take a lot of practice. Especially with extension tube/rings/bellows. Its all very much manual and you need to have the right focal range them to be any good. I use them.... Here is one that I took a few months back using extension rings. Its not a super great one because I was still shaking from this being on my foot
Saying that... this is also using Extension rings too
At the moment I'm solely using Kenko extension tubes with the 50mm prime. I also use a home made flash snoot that I place on the built-in flash to get the light to the subject and diffuse it (still not happy with the diffusion yet mind you).
For settings I almost always shoot at f22, ISO 100 and have the fastest shutter speed that will sync with the flash which is 1/250. I shoot handheld for more maneuverability. Bugs are so addictive to photograph!
@sueb Thank you, Sue :) I don't generally like to have it all in focus actually, but yeah, I understand that's not everyone's cup of tea. However, I have to say, I tried a quick one last night using flash and it worked out okay, but that was with a pen... so I don't know if I'll be doing that for flowers any time soon.
@christiq I certainly appreciate your feedback! :) Thanks! I don't generally check out the exif info here unless I'm aiming for something in particular but because I don't really plan my photos, it makes it hard for me to pause and get online, check and then get back to it, haha. I do see what you're saying about getting it sharper. I've had a lot of overly-blurry macros I've needed to bin, but for the most part, I quite like having it blurry.
@silverhorn Oh gooooosh, and you left it there so you could get a shot??? Haha, the life of a photographer :D I really like the detail in both of those. I used a macro 'lens' (10x close-up ring thing) for this, which I was pleased with:
@dcr I hope you have some in your album :) My next purchase will likely be a flash unit, I think. I'm still unsure if I want to commit to a good macro lens when there are so many toys available, but we'll see.
@indiannie_jones - it got placed onto the carpet but I have to tell you I did not enjoy either the experience of it being on my foot or trying to get the photo lol
I do indeed. In fact maybe too many! Need to get a bit more variety in there - but it's still very early days for me. As for the toys, the extension tubes have kept me satisfied for a while now. But there ALWAYS seems to be something bigger and better!
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
The reason for the f/16 is if you wanted to get all of those stamen in focus versus one in focus. The only way they could all be in focus if you had an f/2 set is if they were all on a level field of view, meaning all the same distance away from your camera.
I usually shoot at about f/8 if I want more of my subject to be in focus.
I usually use a tripod because it's so hard to get a crisp and clear. You can see some of my macro shots on my project.
anyway... i tried this method once.. not long ago.
i taped my 50mm at front of 55-250mm. DoF really thin, if not mistaken that photo @f/25, and still not enough to cover the ants body. IMO, tripod is a must, better with speedlite/flash. After hundreds shots, above is the best i can get.
yeah, with this methods, the magnification level significantly raised. @200mm zoom, this combo will gives around 4x life size (200mm/50mm), but this method also makes:
- DoF really thin, as i mention above,
- dark view finder, meaning difficult to make accurate focus
- vignetting
- working distance.... really short, is useless to capture some active bugs.
- slightly increase chromatic aberration
other option for macro is extension tubes, it's easier to handle.
Thank you SO much! I need to try this more. I also used close-up rings for some of the other shots (without flash) and most came out so blurry that I was tempted to smash my camera against a wall that day :)
The macro extenders are great but are not like having a true macro lens. However, I have a true macro 100mm and a 24-70mm - I get great shots from my 70mm which is not a true macro but gives me awesome light and bokeh.
I think it's personal taste. I do sometimes like it all to be in focus. However, like your posted picture I love having one perfect flower (or whatever) standing out. I think your picture is awesome - but obviously not to everyone's taste.
GO WITH YOUR HEART!!!!
Saying that... this is also using Extension rings too
For settings I almost always shoot at f22, ISO 100 and have the fastest shutter speed that will sync with the flash which is 1/250. I shoot handheld for more maneuverability. Bugs are so addictive to photograph!
I so badly want the 100mm macro lens!!!
@christiq I certainly appreciate your feedback! :) Thanks! I don't generally check out the exif info here unless I'm aiming for something in particular but because I don't really plan my photos, it makes it hard for me to pause and get online, check and then get back to it, haha. I do see what you're saying about getting it sharper. I've had a lot of overly-blurry macros I've needed to bin, but for the most part, I quite like having it blurry.
@silverhorn Oh gooooosh, and you left it there so you could get a shot??? Haha, the life of a photographer :D I really like the detail in both of those. I used a macro 'lens' (10x close-up ring thing) for this, which I was pleased with:
@dcr I hope you have some in your album :) My next purchase will likely be a flash unit, I think. I'm still unsure if I want to commit to a good macro lens when there are so many toys available, but we'll see.
I do indeed. In fact maybe too many! Need to get a bit more variety in there - but it's still very early days for me. As for the toys, the extension tubes have kept me satisfied for a while now. But there ALWAYS seems to be something bigger and better!