Camera to the test

Discuss cameras, settings, composition, or anything related to photography - cactus or other subjects.
Post Reply
User avatar
majcka
Posts: 4321
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Vace, Slovenia, EU
Contact:

Camera to the test

Post by majcka »

I didn't go to the shop as Dave sugested and I didn't buy one. I borrowed one. Some big machine Canon.

That is what I manage to do with it:
IMG_7528.JPG
IMG_7528.JPG (116.83 KiB) Viewed 6242 times
IMG_7529.JPG
IMG_7529.JPG (103.7 KiB) Viewed 6242 times
IMG_7530.JPG
IMG_7530.JPG (100.51 KiB) Viewed 6242 times
IMG_7532.JPG
IMG_7532.JPG (158.77 KiB) Viewed 6242 times
IMG_7533.JPG
IMG_7533.JPG (88.73 KiB) Viewed 6242 times
I can't say there is no difference betwin mine and that one.
Maja

Strange is fun, cacti are funnier!
Google+
Flickr pics
Facebook

Image
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: Camera to the test

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

it was focusing on things other than the main subject most of the time.
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
User avatar
cactushobbyman
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:01 pm
Location: Sanger, California

Re: Camera to the test

Post by cactushobbyman »

Better than my camera.
DaveW
Posts: 7376
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:36 pm
Location: Nottingham, England/UK

Re: Camera to the test

Post by DaveW »

You were probably hand holding at higher shutter speeds and wider apertures, or on auto rather than manual on a tripod Maja? Afraid macro is not usually hand held casual photography. Most of the time I shoot at f16-f22 for depth of field which usually means shutter speeds are too slow to hand hold, so the camera is on a tripod. The old rule for hand holding SLR cameras used to be for lenses from 60mm focal length upwards, a shutter speed no slower than their focal length (e.g. for a 100mm lens a shutter speed no slower than 100th of a second and a 200mm lens no slower than a 200th of a second, but no lens hand held slower than about a 60th or a second since the rule fails for short focal length wide angle lenses). Even modern image stabilisation does not work that well at macro distances.

As depth of field is small in macro photography you would probably need to focus stack to get everything in focus in your first shot. It's usually a case of isolating the subject and confining depth of field to what is essential.

http://www.davewilsonphotography.com/tu ... otography/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My camera is probably little different to the one you borrowed, you just need to learn how to use them since it's not just point and shoot for macro, but preparation and technique.
estabanensis.jpg
estabanensis.jpg (66.52 KiB) Viewed 6224 times
And I'm still learning and trying to get better, as I have not mastered it yet.
Last edited by DaveW on Wed May 22, 2013 10:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
majcka
Posts: 4321
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Vace, Slovenia, EU
Contact:

Re: Camera to the test

Post by majcka »

DaveW wrote:You were probably hand holding at higher shutter speeds and wider apertures, or on auto rather than manual on a tripod. Afraid macro is not hand held casual photography. Most of the time I shoot at f16-f22 for depth of field. As depth of field is small in macro photography you would probably need to focus stack to get everything in focus in your first shot. It's usually a case of isolating the subject and confining depth of field to what is essential.

http://www.davewilsonphotography.com/tu ... otography/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My camera is probably little different to the one you borrowed, you just need to learn how to use them since it's not just point and shoot for macro, but preparation and technique.
estabanensis.jpg
And I'm still learning and trying to get better.
Daiv, I wasn't exactly looking for macro shot yesterday. I was looking for a manual focus thing and shot hand holding. As you can see on my 3rd pic I was able to shot little new growth of spines in the middle of the cactus. I was never able to do that with my own camera. I always get something alse, usually forward spines. If I choose to buy a new camera I will take time to shot macro too.
Maja

Strange is fun, cacti are funnier!
Google+
Flickr pics
Facebook

Image
DaveW
Posts: 7376
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:36 pm
Location: Nottingham, England/UK

Re: Camera to the test

Post by DaveW »

Well you have evidently found out how to focus on something using the focusing screen, now you need to learn how to spread what depth of field you have over the subject by looking all around the screen to see what is in focus. Occasionally using the depth of field preview, if the camera has one, to see what is in focus at the shooting aperture. The screen goes black at smaller apertures when you first press it, so you have to let your eye get used to the gloom before you see anything. Just the same as walking out of a lighted room into the dark when your eyes need a moment or two to see anything again.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/using ... tton-12056" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: Camera to the test

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

if those pictures were attempted with Macro settings, than the lens of the camera was WAY WAY WAY too far away from the subjects. Of course each camera is different. I need a tripod, I dont have one yet.. so all the pictures I take are from manually holding onto the camera... and snapping the pictures. For Macro shots, my lens is as close as possible to the source. I do not use zoom on mine, or it blurs the picture every time!


My words of advice, from my craptastic point and shoot camera! :)
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
luddhus
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:58 am

Re: Camera to the test

Post by luddhus »

FYI: The pictures contain EXIF data. The following is for the first picture, but the rest (the last is slightly different, but not much) were shot with almost the same settings:

Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 550D
Lens: EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Image Date: 2013-05-21 18:06:29 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 55mm
Aperture: f/5.6
Exposure Time: 0.010 s (1/100)
ISO equiv: 250
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No (enforced)
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: sRGB
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined

So, the camera was set to a fixed shutter-speed, the rest was set automatically.

Btw, there is no "macro mode" on this camera, it all depends on the lens.
User avatar
majcka
Posts: 4321
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Vace, Slovenia, EU
Contact:

Re: Camera to the test

Post by majcka »

I must say I'm not a photographer not even by hoby. And to be true I don't even know exactly what macro is (and there is a topic with my posin it to prove that). And I must say I didn't decidet yet if I will buy another camera. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. The main thing I was looking for is an option to shot with manual focusing mode. Why??? Because I'm tired of catching the focus and get all other than what I want. Fof example. Some time ago we were at the ZOO. There is no way to shot a panter (or any other animal) through that bars. My own camera always focus on that darn bar. It doesn't even get to the animal. With manual focusing you can see through bars right? And catch the animal. Same is with my cacti flowers. There just isn't possible to catch a bud through the "bars" of spines to catch a tiny bud. It always focuses on the spines never the bud. If I get too close my lenses don't get anything yust "fog". With manual I can always choose to see through spines to cactc a bud. It is the same example as my 3rd pic. And that is why I need a camera with manual focusing mode. Even if everything alse is automatic set. Maybe in a long time of useing it I will learn to use another pissibility. The other day there just wasn't time to study anything more than manual focus. :D
Maja

Strange is fun, cacti are funnier!
Google+
Flickr pics
Facebook

Image
User avatar
SnowFella
Posts: 1762
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:27 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Camera to the test

Post by SnowFella »

Ought to be able to accomplish that even with auto focus, atleast on a DSLR where you can swap over to spot focus rather than use a wide focus point that lets the camera pick a focal point. Just prefocus on whatever spot you want in focus and then recompose with the shutter button still half pressed, could induce an out of focus photo though if you chance the distance to your subject.
Sure using manual focusing would nail if down even more as it's up to you to focus on whatever you want to be sharp.

Now I'm no photographer but looking at the photos and exif data I'd suggest stopping down, ie go to a higher f number, in order to get a deeper depth of field. f5.6 is generally pretty shallow depth of field, most of my cacti photos get taken at around f10 or higher. Does however decrease the shutter speed so a tripod or higher ISO might be needed to keep things sharp.

Edit: might add in that minimum focus distance is highly dependant on what lens is being used. I've got wide angle lenses that can focus down to about 30cm from the subject and another lens with similar zoom range that has an MFD of well over a meter unless I kick it into manual macro mode.
DaveW
Posts: 7376
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:36 pm
Location: Nottingham, England/UK

Re: Camera to the test

Post by DaveW »

Yes bars could be a problem Maja since unless the camera is stuck between them autofocus may still focus on them. However getting that close to bars to stick the lens between them is not recommended for shooting panthers in a zoo, even if you would be allowed to do it! :lol:

f5.6, as said, is a pretty wide aperture for reasonable depth of field up close. Most of my plant pictures are taken at f16-f22 using aperture priority, though that means shutter speeds too slow for hand holding. For hand holding for insects though I use shutter priority and set the slowest speed for hand holding and have to live with what aperture I get with available light, though using flash would allow smaller hand held apertures.

Actually how close a lens can focus is really unimportant and having to get too close is undesirable, it is what is it's maximum magnification on the film or sensor we are interested in. A 50mm lens that can focus to 1:1 (= life size on the film or sensor) has to be much closer to the subject than say a 100mm-135mm that produces a similar magnification. In fact the problem with many compact cameras on macro setting is you need to get too close to the subject for those magnifications. What is known as "Working Room", the distance from the front of the lens to the subject, is important too. If you can take the same sized image from further away you often do not block the light with your lens, or if taking insects spook them by getting too close. Whilst a 60mm macro lens may be OK for flowers you may have to get too close for insects and so spook them, so a 100mm-135mm on a DSLR will give you extra working room.

http://www.tamron-usa.com/lenses/macrotips.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not sure I like the high ISO settings recommended in the above link though, since you loose image quality. I usually stick to the 100 ISO - 200 ISO range.

The DSLR body is only a starting point Maja, as said the rest depends on the lens you put on it, unlike compact or bridge cameras where you are stuck with the lens it already has.

There is an online book on macrophotography here:-

http://www.macro-photography.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Post Reply