carlj
|
My take on Macro...I don't claim to be an expert - using the technique only 12 mths, but these work for me and if it works for others too, then I'm happy!
1) 1:2 can be just as rewarding as 1:1. I own a Sigma 105mm macro, but most of my close ups are actually using the Tamron 70-300mm - effective length 450mm at 1 metre close focus. With insects, they tend to like their own space so this distance is extremely valuable. And with butterflies and dragonflies, easy enough to fill the frame.
1:1 Sigma 105mm
1:2 Tamron 70-300mm
2) Depth of field is a nightmare as you approach 1:1. Apertures need to be around f11, and even then, unless the subject is parallel to the sensor, rarely fully in focus.
Enough DOF to still allow the background to blur.
3) Watch your shutter speed. Nikon have a dedicated IS/VR macro lens. Unless you own a Sony/Minolta or the latest Pentax, you may have problems hand holding. I always handhold, thanks to anti-shake, as a tripod just gets too much like hard work for what are mainly grab shots! A monopod or bean bag may be better in this area.
4) Remember, you ain't gonna waste shots with digital. Take as many as you can, set drive to continuous and increase the chances of that perfectly focussed shot!
|
creators
|
Great piece Carl. I must say you are a source of inspiration to keep trying. I don't get images as pin sharp as you do even using a tripod, and as I own a Tamron 70 - 300 macro, it has to be practice and experience. I can't remember though, do you manual focus? I seem to recall you mentioning it elsewhere.
|
hil26
|
Thanks ofr the input Carl.
The tamron you mention - do you mean closest focus distance = 1m, at what focal length - the short end or the 300 end. Only ask as my 50-500 quotes same close focus distance as 1m but it seems nearer to 1.5m at the 500 end.
|
adam
|
nice one..
i have abandoned my macro work for a while now..but seeing your stuff makes me wanna get back out there...
|
carlj
|
Keith, thanks for your kind words. With the 70-300mm I can use AF more than with the 105mm, but revert to MF for a lot of shots due to the size of subject - the damselfly is less than 2 inches long. I have heard a few Canikon owners dismissing the AS of KM/Sony as not as good as IS/VR - but as I've mentioned, only Nikon have a VR macro lens. AS helps me to handhold at speeds that other cameras would require supports. As my subjects tend to be fast moving, observant creatures, I've no time to fiddle with tripods!
Dave, the 70-300mm (both Tamron and Sigma) close focus down to 1m at the 300mm end (via macro selector switch). This makes them ideal walk around lenses in the countryside I find. Add a close up filter and you can push the magnification while still retaining a workable comfort zone between you and the subject!
|
hil26
|
| carlj wrote: |
Dave, the 70-300mm (both Tamron and Sigma) close focus down to 1m at the 300mm end (via macro selector switch). This makes them ideal walk around lenses in the countryside I find. Add a close up filter and you can push the magnification while still retaining a workable comfort zone between you and the subject! |
Thanks, that explains it as the 50-500 that I have does not have that facility.
|
creators
|
Thanks Carl, I noticed the other night doing jewellery that the Tamron on AF is not quite pin sharp, it would probably help me to practice in the house with a tripod to see if I can improve it with MF, thanks for the inspiration.
|
carlj
|
Keith, what are you shooting with? Sometimes if the dioptre setting is wrong, you think the af is out when in reality it's how you see it. Took me ages to get Amber's camera set right. Another problem could be the viewfinder itself. Sometimes it's rather dark to focus accurately!
|
creators
|
Oh no!!! I didn't realise the dioptre was adjustable. I have a D80 and have just had a play with the little dial beside it which adjusts it. So now I need to set it up on a tripod and set the bugger. Carl, you are a HERO!
|
carlj
|
Sits in the corner smiling smugly!  
|
creators
|
Aye and well deserved my friend. Enjoy.
The story so far: I think I have set the viewfinder now. I have set the camera up and am taking comparison pictures with the Tamron and my Sigma 50mm, 1:2.8 DG Macro D. As best I can I am going to try for like for like. Initially I am going to use AF. Pics shortly.
|
creators
|
This is what I cannot improve on, I cannot get sharp pictures from the Tamron.
Sigma
Tamron
|
adam
|
blimey! thats no good!!
and the AF is locking on is it?
does the lens take share pics at any range?
|
creators
|
Yep, the AF is locking on, I've suspected this for a while, but it's the first time I've tested it.
I am not sure what you mean by share pics Adam.
|
adam
|
sharp!!! sharp pics!! if you use it for a portrait or landscapes or something...
or is it just for closeup work?
(at work, not supposed to be on the forum, hence not checking spelling!!)
|
Evolution104
|
Another thing to consider Keith is that some macros have a minimum distance they can AF on, but are capable of MF much closer. My Zuiko 35mm macro is like that. If I want to get really close, I can do it, but I have to switch to MF.
Just a thought.
|
creators
|
| Evolution104 wrote: | Another thing to consider Keith is that some macros have a minimum distance they can AF on, but are capable of MF much closer. My Zuiko 35mm macro is like that. If I want to get really close, I can do it, but I have to switch to MF.
Just a thought. |
The cut off for the MF is almost exactly at the same point as the AF mate.
|
hil26
|
Is the second hand camera you found a little while ago? if so, may be the reason why it wsa let go by the original owner.
Is it worth asking Tamron to re calibrate? Not too sure how much that costs though.
|
creators
|
| hil26 wrote: | Is the second hand camera you found a little while ago? if so, may be the reason why it wsa let go by the original owner.
Is it worth asking Tamron to re calibrate? Not too sure how much that costs though. |
Thanks Dave, I'll check that out, because it's the lens I bought second hand last year for the eclipse.
|
carlj
|
Just as an experiment, tried a similar thing to Keith. Tam 70-300 and Sig 105mm macro.
Tamron - raw file processed the same as sigma, no sharpening applied.
Sigma file
|
creators
|
I don't know about anyone else but if there is a difference between those two images, they are undetectable to me. I've just done the same in RAW with the same result as before. Hmmm.
|
Venom
|
Well I think but then with my eyesight who knows, but there's not alot between the two. Is it maybe your lens Keith that need calibrating or something?
|
creators
|
I phoned the shop I bought it from and they had never heard of recalibrating, so I told them what the problem was and they suggested I bring it in with pictures to show the problem and they'd send it back.
|
Venom
|
Sounds like good service to me, are you going to take them up on the offer?
|
creators
|
Yep, hoping to take it back tomorrow, the problem's been bugging me for a while but I've been putting down to my ineptitude.
|
carlj
|
Personally, I can see the difference in sharpness (the mound line around the side) but it's certainly not to the same degree as Keiths.
|
carlj
|
Keith, one little question - do you have a filter on the Tamron? If so, try a shot without it. A shot in the dark but may solve the sharpness problem!
|
creators
|
Thanks Carl, great thinking, but, Gnnnnn, if this works it's gonna hurt. Ho hum, time to find out. Cheers mate.
|
creators
|
Nope, it's the same.
|
|
|
