Ray,
Like to help you but those are North winds, maybe one of your fellow Canucks can help.
CR
Ray, I know a lot of photogs who carry a piece of florist’s wire to calm agitated blossoms.
Hey Ray… sometimes I use a meat skewer and a paper clip…. besides… don’t ya got that anti ((((((((((SHAKE))))))))))) thingie??
P.S. Congtrats on your new purchase… and for getting clean… 🙂
David
when the wind pops up here i just look for somethin else to take a pic of. I don’t ‘chill’ bugs either. But, i’m not a proffessional photographer so i don’t have to.
That sounds like a good idea… I think I have something that can help for now… Thanks!
Ray
Hey Ray… sometimes I use a meat skewer and a paper clip…. besides… don’t ya got that anti ((((((((((SHAKE))))))))))) thingie??
Sigma macro lens doesn’t have the Image Stabilizer. As far as I know, only Canon has it (I mean, Canon lenses for Canon bodies). And at the price they’re selling it, I’m not sure I would have been able to afford it.. !
P.S. Congtrats on your new purchase… and for getting clean… 🙂
Thanks.. 😉
Ray
Well… If I have to wait for the winds to calm down, I better list my lens on e-bay right away… I live one corner of a high traffic street. There is always wind when there’s light (daytime).
And I don’t chill bugs neither. I reprogram them.. 😉
One thing I do chill is my Pina Colada. It tastes much better when served in that fashion 🙂
Ray
"Ray" wrote in message
: One thing I do chill is my Pina Colada.
The Grant’s hatefully delicious analogue Pina Colada (note fraction)
2 Parts Coconut milk + 1 part shredded coconut
2 parts Pineapple juice + 1 part pineapple
2 teaspoons of sugar
1 healthy golop of vanilla extract
1 1/2 parts of rum
Put all into the blender with lots of ice 3 – 6 parts and enjoy. After a few of these even Canon digital images look good. 🙂
Grant
Ray
There is a commercial clamp that fits on you tripod and has a semi rigid arm that hold plants. There are all the hints that people have told you and there is flash. Most of my friends that are big into Macro all use flash usually multi heads. I know more toys to get. I use a flash as a fill in and find that a certain movement of the flower can give a nice softness to the image then the flash really defines it. One of my friends purposely moves the flower with long exposures, he calls it his giggles I call it sh*t …. woops sorry.
Grant
Oh great …now i’m thirsty !!!!!
"Ray" wrote in message
: One thing I do chill is my Pina Colada.
The Grant’s hatefully delicious analogue Pina Colada (note fraction)
2 Parts Coconut milk + 1 part shredded coconut
2 parts Pineapple juice + 1 part pineapple
2 teaspoons of sugar
1 healthy golop of vanilla extract
1 1/2 parts of rum
Put all into the blender with lots of ice 3 – 6 parts and enjoy. After a few of these even Canon digital images look good. 🙂
Grant
One little change…
1 golop of vanilla extract
1 1/2 parts of healthy rum
After which, Nikon gets considered by rookie photographers (the pros continuing to use Canon, of course)
Ray 😉
Just for those who would like to see my first attempts at macro photography:
http://www.pbase.com/image/30783928 (this if the first picture, click on next to see the others, there are about 10 pictures).
Grant: look away please, those are made with a C-a-n-o-n camera… And we all know how found you are of Canon… 😉
Btw, why do you always make fun, or show your lack of interest for Canon? Did you get a Canon once and hate it that much?
I once got a Fuji, and never in my life will I get another one, for various reasons (quality of lens, bad craftsmanship (robots-ship ??), etc.). That being said, I respect Jodi (and I believe Leen and the others) who have Fuji cameras. Sure thing, they use it well! And they seem pretty happy with their camera.
Ray
Ray
Healthy rum? Do tell … I suspect that is my problem when it comes to taking photographs I don’t drink enough rum healthy or not to see the finer points of Canon.
Grant
I saw the Canon ring flash… If I can find one used, perhaps. Thanks for the hints!
Ray
Hi Ray, GREAT photos!
Isn’t Macro fun! Oh do we have a lot of doggone wind, we have too much of it on Cape Cod as we stick way out into the ocean.
My husband loves Macro photography too and he goes out early in the morning. Or early in the evening.
Hi Grant, That is a good recipe, we will have to give it a try, if we have any Rum in the house. And last Sunday when we were canoeing on a small lake, two of your beautiful little damsel/mini dragon-flys landed on a branch sticking up about 4 inches above the surface of the water. I snuck up really close with only my eyes and top of head above the surface, no camera of course, but I sure enjoyed looking at them so close. So delicate and so beautiful!
Jane
Jane
I hate to speak the unspeakable but the recipe is still very refreshing without the rum.
Grant
I hate to spoil the party — or Ray’s delight with his new lens — but does anyone else find these images not as sharp as one might expect?
Is it the subject matter (no crisp edges), my eyesight, or what? I checked out another set of macro photos on pbase (<
http://www.pbase.com/minoltaman/raindrops>
and they definitely have the zing I would expect. Judging by the sizes, the .jpegs seem to have had about the same amount of compression in each gallery.
— Ron
The main difference is that Ray used F8 and the Minoltaman probably F16. Next to that his images are often backlit, so the lighting ratio (contrast) is higher. Moreover, I suppose he used a tripod and there was probably no wind at all.
That makes the Minolta images look sharper.
It certainly is not due to the Sigma lens; I own an older version of this lens and this piece of glass is extremely good value for the money.
Extreme sharpness isn’t always a virtue; sometimes the appropriate use of out of focus parts might produce fantastic images; just check the impressionistic images of Freeman Patterson <
http://www.freemanpatterson.com/>
He is Canadian too as far as I know, so Ray should be able to produce about the same quality, probably even better as Ray is supported by a whole bunch of contributers on this forum…. 😉
GO RAY, GO!!!!
Leen
Ron
Thanks to the link to Don Northup’s work, it is very impressive! Judging from this gallery, The Pollen Snatchers, Enemy Invasion, and Floral Arrays and Rhythms I suspect the difference is not in the lenses but in the techniques. I strongly suspect that Don photographs for the most part in a controlled space. The composition, lighting, and backgrounds scream out "still life" and there is nothing wrong with this his results are very good.
For some strange reason, the quality of macro lenses, for the most part are surprisingly consistent. It is true that there are differences but these differences are usually so small that it take a very critical test to demonstrate them. Judging quality of lenses from images on the web is a real lesson in frustration as one never know how much of the original that is being displayed.
Don’s wonderful images are more to be credited to his technique rather than having a superior lens. Rays images are a credit to his bravery of posting his very first attempts at Macro.
Grant
Macro is a beast, but a tantalising one – as when you do get it right the results can be startlingly good. To get the depth of field close up you need to stop the lens right down, but as soon as you do that every breath of wind or flap of an insect’s wing blurs the image, asyou can’t get a fast enough shutter speed, and you need to use a tripod – which makes hunting minibeasts very difficult. On a compact digicam, many of which can focus very close without special lenses, you add the difficulty of locking auto focus onto precisely the place that you want, and the awful manual focus that most of them have. Flash is a big help – but of course camera mounted flash often isn’t pointing in the right direction and is too bright at these very short distances- I’ve had some success with pointing the flash up and bouncing onto a white card – it both gets the light in the right direction and cuts the minimum range of the flash so it doesn’t overwhelm the subject. Using the flash head at about 45 degrees with an omnibounce which also bounces light down to the subject can also work.
Ray, no image stabilizer on the Canon macros. Many of the long lenses have it, but the premium is pretty high.
Chuck
Chuck
Every camera and every lens I have owned had came with a an image stabilizer. It was called raise the shutter speed to match the lens.
Grant
Grant – I am so bad at raisung the shutter speed as lens length increases. I spent so long when I was learning photography with just a 50mm standard lens, that I tend to forget (especially with a zoom where the lens length is not so easily apparent). Luckily I have fairly steady hands and do use a tripod more frequently these days.
Grant, only you. XD
and bingo was his namo
Grant, that seems like a much better way to manage the shake problem. I have one IS lens, and its motor runs down the camera battery rather quickly. No more….
Hi Ray, What wonderful photography! This is all so much fun, I am learning a lot and hope to sometime get good at Macro. My husband does quite well, but we cannot compare to these great Pbase albums, but the inspiration that they give us is superb. Just look at those individual drops of rain. Makes me want to grab my husband’s camera, whoops its after dark, won’t work tonight.
I will give it a try tomorrow early, isn’t this great fun! Jane
Well so many responses so here is how it works. First find out where you can comfortably hold a camera still with a normal lens. start out with the reciprocal of the lens. A 50 mm lens can generally be hand held at 1/50 of a second held. So work up and down by multiples. For a 35 mm lens use 1/30 for a 100 mm use 1/100 and so on. Each will have different sweet points. For me with proper stance and controlled breathing I can hole a 50 mm lens at 1/30. Leaning against a post or bracing or a monopod I can drop this limit by two stops. Know yourself, know your equipment.
Grant
Ron :
You’re right, my pictures aren’t as sharp as this other guy. However, I didn’t retouch them in Photoshop (only to get them resized in batch). That could explain. And I didn’t use a tripod, some of them are blurry as a result.
To my defense, I’ve also resized the picture, without adding sharpening, that’s no good usually. My mistake.
Leen:
You’re absolutely right… I used the rule of twice the speed for the focal length. In my case, 50mm = 1/100th (or around).
And yes, I AM CANADIAN (as goes the advertisement for a certain brand of beer around here..!!)
I will redo the same exercise another day (not tomorrow, I’m going to see my surgeon… Perhaps I could ask her to take a close-up shot of my stitches… Ok, wrong idea… Next caller please..!)
Grant :
I wouldn’t call it bravery… It’s more.. Pure fun! However, I will be more careful in posting any future pictures 😉
(especially since I don’t have a hateful Nikon, I must be twice careful.. Haha!).
And you never did answer as to why you mock the Canon that much… ? Afraid of revealing your reason(s)?
Susan :
So I’ve just discovered, about the flash… The built-in flash is no use, and the external one will have to be used with the extension cord (it’s like a long telephone cord.. Well, I mean when telephone had cords… A long, long time ago…).
I’ve just checked and my new lens as a minimum aperture of f/45… !! I should be able to get a decent depth of field with that.. 😉
Ray
Ray
The reason I mock Canon’s is because I CAN. I truth of the matter is and please don’t let this get out, is that if I didn’t already have Nikon equipment I would have had a much harder time choosing between the 10D and the D70.
Grant
Ray, no image stabilizer on the Canon macros. Many of the long lenses have it, but the premium is pretty high.
Chuck,
I’ve discovered that, for me, it’s better to have a faster lens than one with IS. I sometimes lack the wider aperture of faster lens. IS would be nice, but not as a first choice anymore.
Of course, being on the delicate subject of photography, each is own… My choice goes for a faster lens. I have one in my hand (IS lens) this morning. It not is more expensive, still has a f/3.5 minimal aperture, but adds an incredible 1 full lbs to the 10D. Soon, I’m gonna have to carry my gear in a wheelbarrow (how chic this is gonna be at weddings.. Lol!!)
Since I’m very impressed with my new Sigma, I’m tempted to look at their other lenses. Also, if you recall, I had a love-hate relationship with my 20mm DG EX F1.8 from Sigma. Earlier this week, I gave it another chance. Glad I did. Shooting RAW, I manipulated the pictures with the tricks I learned since last year and now, I’m fully satisfied with it! Mainly, exposing -1/3 stop under the sun. I was very surprised of the results.
Ray
Every camera and every lens I have owned had came with a an image stabilizer. It was called raise the shutter speed to match the lens.
Grant
There are times when it’s just not possible, because the lens isn’t fast enough… What do you do then? Raise the Sun.. ? 😉
YP
(it’s like XD, but it’s made in Canada… lmfqao !!)
Ray
Ray
If it is not possible the likelihood that an image stabilizer would do any better is not worth the money that you have to put out for them.
G.
Hope I didn’t offend Ray by my earlier posting.
I am truly interested in seeing what his new lens can do, and I’d like to see him give it an unrelenting trial run (while presumably it’s still "on trial") on a variety of subjects.
I once bought, and still have, a 100 mm Pentax macro. It was new old stock at the time, and cost me approximately twice what I had paid for my brand-new Pentax K1000. It’s had a lot of use: copying old photos, shooting flower pix (best done, in my view, on an overcast day), and taking some shots of stuff to sell on eBay. But what really astonished me was how effective it was as a portrait lens. Wonder what "35mm equivalent" the 50 mm lens represents on Ray’s 10D.
As to flowers: unless there are droplets of water, or a sharply-defined pistil/stamen arrangement, many flower pictures look soft-focus to me. Too many curved shapes; too much soft lighting.
I share an opinion with Edward Weston:
"I want the stark beauty that the lens can so exactly render, presented without interference of "artistic effect. Now all reactions on every plane must come directly from the original seeing of the thing…only the rhythm, form and perfect detail to consider."
– E.W., March 15, 1930
— Ron
Ron,
You can talk (or write..) to me directly, no need to address your posting as if I wasn’t actually there (3rd person).. 😉
And no, you didn’t offend me. I do this for fun. I don’t do this for a living, that’s a big difference.
I will, of course, make more test, and this time with a tripod. Also, I will be shooting inside (small objects). I tried it for portrait and it’s actually quite good! Beats my current Canon 50mm which is incompatible with my 10D (I’ve consistent over exposure, or totally out of focus photos, like a few miles away from the subject…).
50mm is 80mm on a 10D (the FOV is 1.6)
Ray
I don’t consider the opinion of Weston as the gospel. Some people, like me, love smooth and soft lines.
Macro photography is difficult and challenging. One usually starts shooting flowers and in the beginning one is satisfied if one can shoot close enough. The real joy on macro is -at least in my opinion- in creating almost abstract compositions with nice, flowing, curves.
About lighting. In my opinion, when shooting macro shots of flowers, the best lighting is often a little backlit. This brings out nicely the structure of the petals. Using an on camera flash provides just only a very flat lighting. This way of lighting is pretty easy, but it just only shows what the subject looks like and unfortunately leaves no room for a personal interpretation of the subject. It is good for catalogueing purposes, but not for more artistic or romantic (like me) souls.
Leen
Folks….
Some great shots Ray and I’d like to support you in your choice of Canon as well. All my shots where taken ‘freehand’ using the standard EFS 18-55mm on a 300D….not like you big boys with 10D.
It was pretty breezy and in some cases one hand held the flower while the other pressed the button. The 300D I think is somewhat lighter than the 10D…maybe this helped.
All natural light. Shutter speed and aperture are shown.
<
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/colin_w/>
Colin
Hi Colin, You have a lovely garden, I enjoyed your pictures! Your climate is similar to ours.
Thanks,
Jane
Colin, lovely pictures! The rose, image 19, is quite charming!
As for the 300D, I tried it when I bought the lens. The guy who sold the lens to me didn’t have a 10D to try it, so he handed me a 300D. And you know, I’m tempted to go sell my 10D and switch for a 300D. It’s so light, and would probably get rid of the problem I have in my neck when I carry my 10D. Although, lately with the new neck strap I got, the problem is less important.
I don’t know what is the 10D made of, but I’m sure, it will resist a nuclear holocaust ! (or Canadian winter…)
Ray
Is that where the term Redneck came from?…:-)
Interesting point about survivability….I lived in Eastern Ontario for a few years and my Olympus wouldn’t work outside during the months of January and February.
I’ve seen reports criticising the plastic feel and light weight of the 300D but it works for me. I was aiming for the 10D but the funds ran out along with my patience.
BTW: At what distance does the term Macro apply?
Colin
Colin
The term macro has taken a new meaning since I first got into photography. In those days macro meant the ability to be able to take an image so the size of the image negative and real life was exactly the same. So it was this one to one reproduction that determined macro. Anything less than this could but still close would be considered close-up photography. More than this ratio was considered micro photography. But now with marketing driving photographic terms it seem that macro mean close. The lens that Ray has is a true macro in the strictest sense of the term The lenses that come with most prosumer cameras are not.
Grant
seems this is where a good high MP camera with good ‘in the box’ lense would do fine in macro mode with cropping. I’m sure alot of the ‘haaaaaa, nice shot’ macros you see on the web are cropped from a larger image….and probably sharpened. The final result is really all that matters….isn’t it ? Shoot and let shoot !
Jodi
You are right the final image is what counts but … in the quest for ever closer and closer with a true macro lens you can crop and sharpen even more getting even "closer" 🙂
Grant
Some wonderful shots Colin, thanks for the link.
—
Have A Nice Day, 🙂
James Hutchinson
http://www.pbase.com/myeyesview http://www.myeyesviewstudio.com/ wrote in message
Folks….
Some great shots Ray and I’d like to support you in your choice of
Canon as well. All my shots where taken ‘freehand’ using the standard EFS 18-55mm on a 300D….not like you big boys with 10D.
It was pretty breezy and in some cases one hand held the flower while
the other pressed the button. The 300D I think is somewhat lighter than the 10D…maybe this helped.
All natural light. Shutter speed and aperture are shown.
<http://homepage.ntlworld.com/colin_w/>
Colin
http://www.arraich.com/ Grant : Ever noticed Jay’s website entry image is of a Canon camera… not a Nikon… a superb, well made, time honoured, loved by all Canon camera…
Thought you’d be interested to notice that…
And we all know that Jay is a man of many talents and good taste, as it shows in every single one of his picture postings for the Challenge…
😉
Ray
lmfqaot
Here is the original uncropped, unaltered photo taken with my Olympus C-4000Z camera (pro-sumer) in its "Super Macro" mode. No special lenses. No tripod, but I did steady myself on the small fence I had around it at the time. We had just had a brief gentle rain shower and when the sun came out I ran and got my camera.
<
http://www.pbase.com/image/30811976>
Not "too" bad for a pro-sumer camera, eh? 🙂 It was the reviews on the Super Macro mode that finally convinced me to buy this camera.
If you go back to the flower gallery, the "fixed" image is the first one in my hydrangea gallery. Be gentle, I only got my camera last October and I’m still learning.
Patti
Patti
Wonderful soft colours and a great image. One of the real joy of pro-sumer cameras is lots of depth of field even at f/3.5, when you need it.
Grant
Ray wrote:
Hi all,
I did it… I took a shower this year..! Felt good, although my skin had a reaction to the soap…
Ok.. Just kidding..
I bought a Sigma 50mm Macro F2.8 IF lens for my 10D (sorry Chuck, Canon wasn’t in stock and the 105mm was about as expensive a my future iBook…). I’ve played with it a few minutes outside. Now, ladies and gentlemen, my question…
HOW THE H… AM I SUPPOSE TO HOLD MY CAMERA AND THE FLOWERS STILL? Sorry for the yelling, I had to vent… I don’t have the most steady limbs, granted, but wow… It’s kind of a complicated area of the joyfull world of Photography! Does anyone has Mother Nature address so that I could write to her (calling is out of the question, I still can’t talk) to ask her to lower the winds for a few moments, tomorrow afternoon.. 😉
Ray
Ray,
I have hibiscus plants on my front porch in pots. I try to take pictures of the blooms as they come up, but lately it seems that no matter HOW CALM it is when I walk out with the camera, a strong wind comes up. Now I KNOW my pictures aren’t good enough to rival the reality of the blooms, but Mother Nature so jealous that she must send winds to prevent my taking pictures? Sigh.
