Lmarc Loc: Ojojona, Honduras

Over the past week lots of folks have posted close-ups and macros that are absolutely outstanding! I particularly remember some from Silver and John Brown. Also, somewhere I got a link to the site of Douglass Moody (Nikonian?). I am totally overwhelmed at some of the photos there!

I my question is how do you guys deal with depth of field at such close ranges? Also, how do you deal with movement of subject matter, bugs, frogs, etc.?

I seem to always have very shallow depth of field unless I stack the images, but many of these do not lend themselves to stacking.

bobmielke Loc: Portland, OR

Having taken a Kelby Macro Course just yesterday I have a few answers straight from the lessons. Depth of field(area in focus) works with a hardfast rule that you are in focus 1/3 of the distance from where you focused and 2/3 of the distance behind the subject. So the other determining factors are the focal length of the lens used and the aperture(F-stop) chosen.

Photographing live subjects may require longer focal length lenses all the way to 200mm. A 200mm macro, capable of a 1:1 capture, is very expensive. A good trade-off on price versus distance to subject is the 85mm F/3.5 VRII Micro. It gives the best bang for the buck and is nearly half the price of the next option up, the 105mm Micro.

Depth of field is so narrow that handholding these lenses is not advisable as any movement changes that extremely shallow depth of field. Yes, I'm sure some will chime in that they hand hold their lenses but I said only that it's not advisable.

Lmarc Loc: Ojojona, Honduras

Thanks, Bob. As usual you're very informative!

I'll check out the 85mm. My only real macro right now is an old Nikkor 55mm (I think, maybe 50mm) used only with manual settings on the D-60. It works great and is very sharp, but the depth of field is the pits, at least the way I'm using it.

bobmielke Loc: Portland, OR

I previously had the 60mm F/2.8 Nikon Micro which was incredible sharp but made you get really close to the subject to get a 1:1 close-up. I traded it along with some other really good stuff to be able to upgrade from my D90 to my D7000. Since that purchase I bought that 85mm F/3.5 VRII Micro which now doubles as a very good close-up portrait lens. The 60mm, like the 50mm has barrel distortion if used as a close-up portrait lens. I'm very happy with my 85mm. THe VR(Vibration Reduction) doesn't hurt either.

Greg Loc: Maryland

You're right Bob, I have handheld, and it's not advisable unless you have a subject that won't move and you can do retakes. I've shot a couple that didn't need retakes, but with literally a few millimeters of DOF it's VERY difficult to hold still long enough to get a shot in good focus. so, in a pinch, if you have to choice, give it a shot. if you have a choice, you definitely want a stabilizer of some type starting with preference being a tripod.

naturepics43 Loc: Hocking Co. Ohio - USA

I thought that with a dedicated flat field macro lens ( micro nikkor 105mm f 2.8), that the depth of field was 1/2 in front & 1/2 behind point of focus

chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon

OK, knowing the numbers of distance maybe more than I want to deal with in the field. I look at 2.8 macro lens as having a shallow DOF as part of its how and why it is built.

johnr9999 Loc: Carlton, OR

one thing you can do is use an off camera flash. The speed of the flash will freeze the subject.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

I am forever amazed at your depth of knowledge bobmielke as well as your depth of field in the field of depth of field. In the in term I will look at definitive articles such as:
http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html
http://www.geometer.org/beginner/macro.html
Somewhere I referenced the use of long mm lenses with extension tubes to photo bugs at a distance. here is one:
http://photo.net/nature-photography-forum/00GsAS
and here are the tables to go with various lenses:
http://kenmcvayphoto.clymbers.com/articles/extensiontubes.html
Agreed you do not have time to do calculations and read charts to shoot a bird in the field, but you can pre plan and have a few quick ones in you head or on a cheat sheet.

bobmielke Loc: Portland, OR

LOL I guess part of it is being 62 years old and a photographer for 42 of those years. I have spent a lot of those 42 in a darkroom learning my craft. It also helped to have use very basic cameras like the Yashika Mat 124 twin lens reflex. There was no meter and no split level viewfinder to use as you manually focused. The waist level viewer was reversed so you had to use the left side of your brain. LOL

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Well, Bob, I beat you by a few years in both age and photo experience, but that has at times minimal to do with the modern era. Altho optics is basic to the craft, most notable as of late is SONY and the use of classic Minolta Maxxum Lens system! Reading the history of Maxxum, they were fine lenses. Proving old is not necessarily out moated and useless. By the way like you, my first "good camera" was a 2.25 sq twin lens reflex also.

There were many virtues of later 35mm with knobs and meter in view finder and center spot focus help. And it would be great to have one of those with a full digital sensor. Our brains composed, lite compensated, judged f and speed almost in a flash!! But those days are no longer around. This is the digital age with super zooms that work from macro to 20+x with good quality image. Soft ware that does the work in an instant,, if you wish to doge or burn,,, or if like me you submit all that to Topaz and just use PS as a grind machine for processing.

You and I both Bob are at times may sound to newbies pompous in our knowledge, that affliction comes with excess knowledge and too much machine wisdom. We must remember that many are new to the field and we must be gentle with them and make the feel good about their progress and not oppressed by to old masters... tough to do,,,

I tend to assume every one is familiar with the physics of optics, circuit design, capable of taking a flash apart and replacing a cap or tube,,, NO, NO, No,,, these are humans and not overly educated brain machines. They enjoy photography not all this confusing tech stuff; they need simple definitive answers, of a practical nature.

I try to give them reference articles so they can read and look at some drawing and graphs... I do appreciate your knowledge bob and you give good advice,,, for that I thank you and I am open to your opinions and thoughts and never cul what you say. Keep contributing to me and others thanks.

bobmielke Loc: Portland, OR

dpullum - I was just talking to the moderator of the best photographic forum on the web and he thanked me so much for sending him so many photographers from this site. I've had a few contact me privately and ask if I though they were "worthy". LOL

I had to chuckle at that for on ShutterFreaks I ask the same question of myself. There are some super talented photographers there that have galleries full of wondrous photos. I had to apologize to Hugh for being absent lately what with my time being dedicated to this site. I don't know it all but I do know a lot that can help those wiling to learn. I've owned too many cameras to count including a half dozen beautiful medium format gems.

I appreciate your kind words of encouragement. It's good to share stories with another photographer.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Yep Bob, hard to let em go I still have my Nikon 8008, and the Kodak 4800 still works, a whole 3 meg pix. At one time I had a collection including some glass plate and the old press camera,,, but a house fire took care of those.

My best buy was a Kodak Medalist, 35 cents all the money I had left after a good flea mkt day... the camera did not work so the guy wanted to give it away.... ooops it does not work until you twist the lens and it is a 100 mm for taking portraits!!! Keep on shootin bob. http://www.shutterfreaks.com/ looks good.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

I am an active field macro-photographer, and an absolute fanatic about maximum DOF. To that end, I choose to shoot my Nikon D90 & Nikkor 105-mm macro lens at 1/200-sec & f/22. To achieve decent background sunlight exposure, I set my ISO to 400. That dictates more light for my subject, which is usually 6-in to 10-in from my lens front element. I use a standard Nikon SB-600 flash unit with a $30 O-Flash 3/4-ringlight attachment. (See my Avatar image to left).

I hand-hold all of my field macro work, so I can shoot dorsal, ventral, lateral, and head-on images of small insects such as ladybird beetles and large insects such as dragonflies. The 105 gives me enough separation distance from subject so that I usually do not spook my insect target.

With flash, insect movement is greatly reduced, even at 1/200-sec.

Mating Ladybird Beetles, 5:1 or 5x life size


Crab Spider on Dahlia, 1:1 or life size


Red Skimmer Dragonfly, 1/3-life size

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Nikonian72, great shots, Macro is of the moment and excess equipment not welcome. I agree with that.
I just ordered a $36 ring flash (LED) If it turns out well, I ll post the info.
With the 105 are you using extension tubes or is it designed to have a narrow field with high magnification?
Educate me Please. Don d/p