|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2400
Your making me want to try full frame again 
I'm looking on mpb like.....
|
|
|
|
(Click for full size)
|
|
|
|
Buzzinga
I never knew bees have five eyes 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2397
Check out some of this dude's work
https://beingmark.com
Something to aspire to 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2396
I'm trying to set up some wide angle macro but my wide lenses don't work with either the raynox or extensions 
The 17 will have to do for now until I can get my 7.5mm prime back from Dorset.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2395
We must conclude that they flap faster than 250 times per second
Side on innit, you can sort of see the blur of the near one
EDIT:
For bees apparently they flap between 200 - 300 times per second, I'd say you probably want to try about double that and experiment from there. 1/640 ???
Just looked at the S/S for the Bee Fly in post 2348 - that one was 1600.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2394
Brilliant 
Who stole the beeflys wings 
What shutter speeds are recommended for bees in flight? I was messing about yesterday lunchtime using available light only, shots didn't look right with sharp wings but I just couldn't find the balance between blurred wings and sharp fur
|
|
|
|
Made a flash diffuser/beamer from card, tinfoil and gaffa.
Another big difference!
Now as long as I'm well off sun angle, shots are so much better lit and there's more detail as a consequence.
Discovered my lens was back-focussing.
Had a suspicion it was but just put it down to hand-holding.
Only -6 but it's made a huge difference at that level.
Also realised that the exposure tricks I use for long lens are pretty much the opposite down this end!
I'm used compromising to high ISO's to maintain a 1000+ shutter speed, exposing well to the right to reduce noise, and taking highlights down afterwards.
In macro I'm finding that I have bags of shutter speed at 250 (the flash does the freezing) and it's better to expose dark and not to blow any highlights at all, and with the ISO at 100 it's much more forgiving when you pull shadows. You can't pull shadows at higher ISO's due to the noise.
This looks up a gear to me 
(Click for full size)
|
|
|
|
Another little "light-bulb-moment" this morning. ('scuse pun!)
Was thinking about multiple light sources to eliminate shadows when I suddenly realised - using a flash I already have 2, just need to position them correctly.
Normally if the sun is out it is natural to shoot to take advantage of it with the sun at my back.
Using flash on top of the camera just increases that contrast of light/shadow as it's the same direction intensified.
This is obvious in processing when the dynamic range needs some serious reigning in in RAW conversion and in PS afterwards.
I had the thought that shooting INTO the sun with flash would be a better option and tried it.
It is! 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2391
I'm learning, and re-learning a lot this week.
My 17mm 1.8 makes a very interesting macro lens with extention tubes
But gives no working distance whatsoever, this fellas leg was on the lens
I've also re learned not to delete from the camera, this would have gone for sure
Red velvet mite
I also now know I need some plants that wake up earlier, there's no colour at the moment
I've also learned that South facing star trails are ugly, red intensifier filters don't cut light pollution now its all from leds and add some really weird colours, and even with the current clean air, astro shots in London don't work
Live composite, about 40 mins worth of 25sec exposures @400 iso! Pulled back in post too
Quite frustrating with meteor showers over the next week
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2390
You get days where loads just seems to fall into place then months of learning bugger all!
Found a dead one to practice on this morning so I think this is the limit of the gear I have.
180 lens, 1.4 converter, 100 ISO, f9 (which I keep coming back to as the sweet spot)
Lit by flash on full and a high CRI torch.
Focus incrementally stepped and shutter fired via EOS Utility on the laptop.
Of course I'd never get anywhere near that kind of thing in the field but interesting to see.
Length of body & head = about 5mm
(Click for full size)
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2389
Just had a quick took, over 80 "what lens" or "what camera" type threads since 2017, over a thousand posts, this thread has had a hundred posts in that time and most of them are us two over the last week
It's funny seeing some of my questions from a few years back, i remember some of the things I was trying to shoot and struggles I had with some technical details that seem so simple and trivial now. There really is no substitute for experience!
The house I'm working in this week, the garden is almost deafening with the amount of bugs buzzing about, I might warn the neighbours there'll be a nutter doing yoga with a camera tomorrow
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2388
Used to be quite a popular thread.
Carp angling seems to attract less "countrymen" and more "screenies" these days.
The gadget threads seem to get plenty of traffic!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2387
I had to check the name
I actually read this whole thread yesterday, it's a shame so many pics are missing but there are some amazing macro shots going back a bit
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #2386
Good find - he actually has exactly the same lens and body choices as me!
Officially the gain in magnification is about 20% with a 25mm tube
Interestingly it looks like my failed TC experiment may be back on again though, apparently AF is available at f8 and below, I think I left it at 9 or 10 yesterday when trying it.
|
|
NON Carp stuff