I've done the same--loved macro in the film days then got a career that left too little time for photography. Retired two weeks ago. As I have been converting to digital I look back at what I ended up with film and then have tried to replicate what I liked with modern alternatives that worked the same way. I avoided all the things that I tried and before and did not work for me. Enjoy!
Very nice. You have taken a style I generally do not like and created an image I like very much. I always appreciate someone who can open my eyes to something new. Thank-you.
The duration of the flash is very short, often less than 1/1000 of a second. The flash sync speed is the fastest shutter speed where the entire frame is exposed at one time. To get faster shutter speeds the shutter starts closing before it is completely open and a slit of open shutter moves across the frame. So if the sync speed is 1/200 s then at 1/1000 s only 1/5 of the frame is being exposed at a time and the flash would fire and expose only 1/5 of the frame, the rest would be underexposed. At 1/2000 s shutter duration only 1/10 of the frame is exposed at one time, etc.
Nature is the most complex, convoluted thing known, short of the human brain; but that is nature.
What's wrong is simplifying complex problems into memes. We all loose if we don't have intelligent conversations based on facts.
I have the Canon 10-22 which I like very much. Distortion is fairly low for such a wide zoom and flare is very minimal.
I got 245. To obtain the same field of view using the entire sensor area you would need a 300mm on the Pentax. Then cropping the image from the Pentax by 1.23 would give an effective focal length of 300/1.23 which is 245mm.
Both sets are excellent! I don't see the difference in depth of field. Some of the bees are at different angles and the primary focus is sometimes at the near side of the bee and sometimes in the middle. If the final magnification and aperture are the same the depth of field should be the same as well.
So what happens when a 28 year-old who chooses to skip getting insurance gets hit by lightning. Who pays for it? Why should I, or my insurance, pay? Do we let him die (not an option!)? Why not make him get insurance so that does not happen? Why not have everyone contribute to insurance and everyone get the benefits? The last would be the least expensive option for everyone over our lifetimes.
It's lens flare, a reflection of the sun off elements in the lens and would happen in any shooting mode.
The lens flange to image plane for the Nikon Z7 is only 16mm. For the Sony E mount it is 18mm. You would need an adapter that is only 2mm thick which is probably not possible. The Nikon F lenses have an image to flange distance of 46.5mm so you need an adapter that is 30.5mm thick, easy to manufacture.
I especially like the black and white version. My favorite aspect of the color image is that the only colors are complementary yellow and blue.
The 1st looks more natural to me.
Since the paper is touching the glass I would be VERY hesitant to remove it from the frame; the paper and/or ink my stick to the glass after that much time. Removing the glare from the glass may help readability and ease PP. To do that set the camera so that the sensor is parallel to the paper (use a tripod). Illuminate it with two identical lights, one on each side oriented at a 45 degree angle to the glass in an otherwise darkened room. Place polaroid sheets in front of the lights, both oriented at the same angle (you can check this be placing the polarizing material on top of each other and rotating them so that light passes through them and keeping them in that relative orientation). Place a polarizing filter over the lens and rotate it so that the glare off the glass is gone. To improve detail you may want to photograph it in overlapping sections (maintaining a constant distance from paper to camera) using manual exposure and then stitching them together as in a panorama. I hope I was clear enough. Let me know if you have any questions.