When looking at or printing images, do you have a rule of thumb for which level of magnification works best? At 100% edges are often blurred but as you decrease the magnification the image may look sharper, but you are losing some information.
Or am I asking the wrong question?
I'm still pretty new to all of this but, I'll tell you a few things that come mind.
A lot of this will depend on what image quality setting you have set on your camera. Also, how many mega pixels your are working with on your particular camera model. These are more or less the same thing.
The more pixels you are working with, the more you can magnify (when viewing)without loosing image quality.
More experienced people should chime in shortly :wink:
I find 100% viewing can be good in diagnosing issues with the image or equipment used to take the image. It's really of no use when printing an image or making a jpeg for online viewing. What are you trying to establish/accomplish?
I am using stacking software to get pictures of scorpions for a colleague. I am using a Nikon 5300 with the 105 macro lens and using Helicon Remote and Focus. The legs have very fine bristles that are used in identification, so I want to keep them clearly visible. At high magnification they start to blur, too low and they are no longer clear. I have been playing it by ear, but wondered if there was typically a 'sweet spot' in such cases.
Would probably be best to see the image you are talking about before offering any advice that has you chasing your tail. Please upload a copy to the thread and tick the store original option...
For best image capture with a Nikkor 105G macro lens, you should be shooting at f/5.6 for focus stacking.
Naturally, camera set to raw + high rez JPG.
I do not understand why you are asking about viewing magnification.
I routinely print macro captures to 19x13-inch.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.