Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
True Macro-Photography Forum
Tree Trunk Surprise
Apr 24, 2012 23:22:31   #
Macfid Loc: Sydney
 
Today I have a loan on a Sony SAL100M28. My aim/goal was to keep as close to 1:1 as poss. I don't have a focus rail and have had to gently nudge 1 leg of my tripod for fine focus. I spent a hour trying to shoot a v.v. small spider hanging between two branches when I realized that for the whole time this little beastie was about 10cms away on the same tree... further down the trunk. I only noticed it when it moved. I'm not surprised... such good camouflage. It was pretty dark as well... I was up to 6 to 15 secs exposure to get any light and depth of field (available light only). I'm quite pleased with the rusults under the circs. It's about 2 cms toe to toe.

Sneaky spider 1
Sneaky spider 1...

Sneaky spider 2
Sneaky spider 2...

Sneaky spider 3
Sneaky spider 3...

Reply
Apr 24, 2012 23:30:35   #
tainkc Loc: Kansas City
 
These are actually very nice. I would have thought that with a 100mm macro, that the front left legs would be more in focus. I do understand your lighting problems. I have the Sony 30mm macro. Now talk about a pain in the ass! Now, if I can only figure out how long 2 centimeters is.

Reply
Apr 24, 2012 23:36:22   #
Macfid Loc: Sydney
 
tainkc wrote:
These are actually very nice. I would have thought that with a 100mm macro, that the front left legs would be more in focus. I do understand your lighting problems. I have the Sony 30mm macro. Now talk about a pain in the ass! Now, if I can only figure out how long 2 centimeters is.
Just under an inch tainkc :) I have the SAL30M35 as well... My very first efforts with that were posted recently. I'm having fun with both, but reeeeeally want that focus rail :)

Reply
 
 
Apr 24, 2012 23:54:25   #
tainkc Loc: Kansas City
 
Macfid wrote:
tainkc wrote:
These are actually very nice. I would have thought that with a 100mm macro, that the front left legs would be more in focus. I do understand your lighting problems. I have the Sony 30mm macro. Now talk about a pain in the ass! Now, if I can only figure out how long 2 centimeters is.
Just under an inch tainkc :) I have the SAL30M35 as well... My very first efforts with that were posted recently. I'm having fun with both, but reeeeeally want that focus rail :)
Yeah, me too. I am saving up for the 100mm.

Reply
Apr 25, 2012 00:07:24   #
sarge69 Loc: Ft Myers, FL
 
You see. I see the title and click. Aaarrghhhhh another SPIDER.

Sarge

Reply
Apr 25, 2012 00:25:12   #
tainkc Loc: Kansas City
 
Oh, yeah. Everyone on here knows that Sarge hates spiders. Lol. Ha, ha! Sarge.

Reply
Apr 25, 2012 00:45:24   #
Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA
 
sarge69 wrote:
You see. I see the title and click. Aaarrghhhhh another SPIDER.
Just for you, Sarge, I asked OP to not mention "spider" in title.

Reply
 
 
Apr 25, 2012 00:50:17   #
Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA
 
Macfid wrote:
I was up to 6 to 15 secs exposure to get any light and depth of field (available light only).
This is exactly why most serious field macro-photographers use special lighting to increase DOF and dramatically shorten shutter duration. Here is a thread about macro set-ups: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-32754-1.html

Reply
Apr 25, 2012 08:14:11   #
jdeanb Loc: Texas / central
 
Macfid wrote:
tainkc wrote:
These are actually very nice. I would have thought that with a 100mm macro, that the front left legs would be more in focus. I do understand your lighting problems. I have the Sony 30mm macro. Now talk about a pain in the ass! Now, if I can only figure out how long 2 centimeters is.
Just under an inch tainkc :) I have the SAL30M35 as well... My very first efforts with that were posted recently. I'm having fun with both, but reeeeeally want that focus rail :)
I have a focus rail on order and should be here any day. Also have a better tripod coming or at least I hope it is better. Just very hard to focus on tripod without a rail. Thank you for sharing your photo.

Reply
Apr 25, 2012 08:19:45   #
jdeanb Loc: Texas / central
 
Nikonian72 wrote:
Macfid wrote:
I was up to 6 to 15 secs exposure to get any light and depth of field (available light only).
This is exactly why most serious field macro-photographers use special lighting to increase DOF and dramatically shorten shutter duration. Here is a thread about macro set-ups: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-32754-1.html
I have about the same setup and also used the setting that Nikonion72 suggested yesterday and hand held. Came out pretty good considering the wind was playing havoc. Just was not the right day to shoot but did learn some things so was time well spent. Thanks Nikonion72.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
True Macro-Photography Forum
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.