dSLR thread

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,497
Location
USA
The one on the top of the camera is though. :nono:

Only because Canon is lazy/cheap. I never noticed this before because the 1D/s series has 3 1/2 digits and I only use RAW. The high count could easily be exceeded by jpg users though. :cat:
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
I'm looking for a 0-60 for photography cheat sheet. A number of the people I know have recently purchased DSLRs after seeing me shoot mine. They know nothing, and I know barely more.

1-2 pages starting with focal length and FOV, going through ISO and shutter speed, and probably ending with aperture and DOF.

Not looking for composition, technique, or more complex tricks (yet).

If it doesn't exist, I'll need to put something together. Any suggestions?
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,497
Location
USA
There are numerous books out there. Look up Bryan Peterson. The ones on seeing creatively and understanding exposure are a good start. There are plenty of basic hardware guides on the web, but that is not where the younger generation suffer.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Most of these guys are in their 50s, if that counts as the younger generation ;)

I'm not going to be able to teach them the creative/composition side of things because I don't know it. What I can show them is how to take a picture of what they want. How to get their desired target in the frame, expose it properly without excessive camera shake, and possibly control their DOF to only get their desired result.

Depending on how that works out, we may expand to stuff that I understand less, like what makes a good picture.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
Hmm, e_dawg said in Jan '09 he was getting married in the summer, so we can conclude the marriage is the reason he no longer posts on SR :D.

Yes, that, along with changing jobs, looking for and moving into a new house, having a baby girl, taking care of said baby girl, working on the house and garden, and being swamped at work.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
Thanks guys.

LM, were you asking me about what was used for the baby pics? If so, first 4 were Nikon D700 + AF-S 60/2.8G macro and last 3 were Sony A700 + Sony 30/2.8 DT macro.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,497
Location
USA
Thanks guys.

LM, were you asking me about what was used for the baby pics? If so, first 4 were Nikon D700 + AF-S 60/2.8G macro and last 3 were Sony A700 + Sony 30/2.8 DT macro.

AF-S 60/2.8G macro is really nice.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
AF-S 60/2.8G macro is really nice.

Yep. Optically, it's one of the very best lenses i have ever used. Right up there with the Olympus ZD 35-100/2 and Sony Zeiss ZA 135/1.8. With these 3 lenses, you can tell even from the first few shots that they are simply a cut above... (IMHO).
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,497
Location
USA
Useful DOF is limited by physics. There are numerous calculators out there or create an Excel template. Below around f/8 diffraction limits per pixel resolution of the 7D. Smaller apertures may be acceptable depending on final magnification, i.e. print size and viewing distance. DOF can be artificially increased though image stacking, which is best done by either moving the subject or camera on a precision (motorized) rack. There are also techniques for oblique sub-mm plane lighting, but I don't belive they are as popular now that image stacking is straightforward.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
Any tips for managing DOF in macro? There doesn't seem to be much of it.

Yeah, not a big fan of high-mag macro because of that (not to mention lighting issues as well). Even 1:1 is too much for me. I'd never even consider using a TC on top of that. I prefer ballpark around 1:3 generally and try to use f/11-16. 1:2 is probably the closest to "true" macro that i shoot. Focus stacking as LM pointed out is generally the best solution, but i find it to be a PITA myself, so i avoid it.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Thanks for the tips. I got the TC (and the lens, for that matter) because it gives me a capability I didn't have before. Not sure what I'll use it for, or even if I'll like it, but now I can find out.

What are your favorite macro subjects and techniques?
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
To be honest, I'm not a big fan of macro due to the tedium and time consuming nature. Don't have much time or energy for that anymore. My favourite "technique" would be avoiding macro situations altogether ;) ... but if i had to do it, i would probably consider the following:

1. A camera with good live-view and magnified MF assist capability with a tilt/swivel LCD, MLU (or a mirrorless camera), and remote release

2. Good Tripod/head combo, and ideally, a focusing rail, too

3. Ring light or multi-strobe lighting setup, reflectors, diffusion screens / softboxes, stands & clamps

4. Focus stacking program

5. Lots of patience
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
You should have started with a better looking coin. :p

How many images did you stitch to generate that?

I actually like the beat-up look. Otherwise it would look fake. I first tried with a dirtier one, but then it gets gross at that magnification.

I was manipulating the coin by hand, so it took more shots than it should. I think 27 was the final number.
 

blakerwry

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Oct 12, 2002
Messages
4,203
Location
Kansas City, USA
Website
justblake.com
Thanks for the tips. I got the TC (and the lens, for that matter) because it gives me a capability I didn't have before.


A buddy showed me that you can achieve similar results by removing the lens and reversing its orientation to the camera.... like looking through a telescope backwards.

I've got some neat shots that way -
http://blakerwry.zenfolio.com/p909310947 (direct from camera)

Though it's very tedious and you lose Exif data when your camera doesn't have a lens attached... not to mention concerns about damage due to dust/debris.

I've also used a cheap magnifying lens filter attachment to get interesting results. http://blakerwry.zenfolio.com/p973937502/h14b5d675#h14b5d675
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
I've done the lens reversing thing before, and even looked at getting one of the reversing rings designed for it, but for running around in the field, it doesn't really work for me.

That shot was done with the subject on the floor, and the camera pointing straight down (only way to keep the eye in the focal plane). I tried putting a light box over the tripod, camera, and head, but that just highlighted the camera even more. I'm assembling something that will allow just the lens to poke through, though it will be pretty claustrophobic.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,497
Location
USA
3. Ring light or multi-strobe lighting setup, reflectors, diffusion screens / softboxes, stands & clamps

Unfortunately many of the newer photographers don’t learn the basics of lighting. A semester of that would be a really good idea before starting in with macros, which are often at least as challenging.

I've used a multitude of ring rings and twin lights from the 1960s explosion-loud, AC-powered poppers to the MT-24 EX. Only rarely are they the best choice alone. Usually on-camera lighting is fill or occasionally key with other lights in softboxes. The longer macros in particular are not a good choice for most on-lens only flash use due to the narrow incident angle. 2-3 monolights on the background and modeling the subject (along with on camera/lens lights for closest subjects) are my preference for studio macros. Despite the advances of digital and TTL, fully controllable strobes and a good flash meter are very useful in setting up ahead of time and maintaining consistent results from frame to frame and session to session. For indoor work it is desirable to work tethered so that the results can be seen in real time before breaking down the setup and without disturbing the precise camera position.

For field work in the 80s and 90s I built a 2-headed TTL Nikon flash that was used on a bracket, sometimes in conjunction with a second on-camera flash. The two heads were flexible enough to bend into various shooting positions. I think there are probably commercial flashes of that type now. The old Vivitar 90-180 macro was nice for changing magnification without having to move the lights around. I had the 55/2.8, 60/2.8 AF, and a couple of 105 micro Nikkors (MF and AF-D) for various purposes over the years. The Nikkor 70-180 was just great for the macro range, but a little late for my opportunities had moved on. They are now hard to find and more costly used than when new in 1998.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,926
Location
USA
Yeah I don't know what made them choose APS-H, but will that mean a possible full-frame sensor at 180MP in the future?
 
Top