On my old camera, the macro setting is kind of like a landscape setting, with a high F-stop. https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/358462668
In this ob of a dimorphic springtail, everything is in pretty good focus despite the multiple different components of the shot.
It’s the minimum focus distance :(
I still can’t find the setting for going all-out manual
I went out today and tried the Raynox. I think it was a pretty good success for the first time! I got several hundred bad shots but there were a few good ones too! I’ll post them when I have the time :)
I found it!! The ‘M’ stood for manual exposure or something like that on my other camera.
I can manipulate shutterspeed there, but haven’t found how to switch other options (which would be great, since, with an F-stop of 11 and an ISO of 100, my photos in a well-lit bedroom turned out completely black…again.
Per this review, your lens should have a minimum focus distance of about a foot (from the camera sensor) or a working distance of about 6 inches and go up to 1:1 magnification: https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-vr-105mm-f2-8g-macro-lens
There are some tips in the review on how to use the different focus settings of the lens.
Based on the springtail photo you shared, I am not certain whether the problem is actually not being able to get close enough, as it looks like the camera has focused on the leaf in front of the springtail, so it may be a problem of the autofocus struggling to find a tiny subject.
Yes, definitely. Although it’s likely the case that your pop-up flash has been designed with portraits in mind, so the illuminated area might not be exactly where you want it. If you find this is the case, don’t fret. I’m sure there are plenty of online tutorials showing how to make your own diffusers and hoods out of stuff you’d have at home.
At F11 and ISO 100, I expect you would need a long exposure or use flash indoors. I’m not familiar with your camera but based on my photography experience I guess you could shoot with a tripod for shake-free long exposure of a non-moving subject, or dial up the ISO (e.g. to 400), or open the lens to a smaller F-stop.
If you’re doing macro photography, you probably need to think about adding light, e.g. a ring flash or LEDs to illuminate your subject. I carry an LED flashlight in my camera bag to quickly add some extra light to bugs etc. The advantage of it over a flash mounted on the camera is that I can easily vary the angle of the light, e.g. to provide side-lighting or back-lighting. However, it does take either an extra hand to hold it or some way to fix the flashlight in place, which can be tricky in the field (for indoors, I have flexible holders that clamp to my tripod or the stage on which the subject is placed).
For focusing handheld shots with the Raynox macro lenses, I found what works best for me is to lock the focus and then slowly move the camera back and forth while taking a series of pictures, hoping a few of them will hit the “sweet spot” for the very narrow focal plane. I delete a lot of blurry pictures, sometimes only getting a handful of usable shots out of a hundred, but with digital that’s cheap. If your subject is moving (e.g. bugs or flowers swaying in the wind), using a tripod is pretty useless.
Yes, right now I am doing only macro, since that’s the only lens I’ve bought so far. I’ve fixed my on-camera light on my camera, so that freed a hand, but it can be tricky when I need to hold a plant still because it is windy and my subject is being tossed around. So I only have one hand on the camera with a small F-stop. I’m still getting used to the weight of it (my old camera is SO much lighter) but I’m hoping I’ll adjust soon.
I am still having trouble understanding your problems with the F-stop. Your lens (not your camera) has a normal range of apertures, which you should be able to set or which the camera will set for you if you are using automatic settings.
The aperture determines how much light reaches the sensor. It also affects depth of field, but not dramatically so, as depth of field also depends on other factors (focal distance, magnification, etc.).
If you choose to use a high f-number (small aperture) you will likely need to compensate in other ways to get enough light – e.g. slower shutter speed, higher ISO, flash. If you use a lower f-number (large aperture) the depth of field will be somewhat less but you will be able to use a faster shutter speed.
cameras have up-and-down sides. If you are looking at birds, sometimes a phone is enough to take identifiable, or a bird feeders, even good photos. Macro requires details for id, and best is a full frame (not crop sensor, but often very expensive, crop sensor is more affordable). It does not been that crop-sensor cameras take bad images, I currently use one too, but not the epic ones you see on Instagram.
IMO, full frame really doesn’t make much of a difference when it comes to macro. Take a look through @bsw_md’s incredible images on here (and even more images on instagram). He uses OM-System cameras, which use a MFT sensor, which is actually has a smaller sensor than APS-C camera ones. The main issue with smaller sensors is that they are more susceptible to grainy photos, but modern cameras can handle that extremely well. The main factors when it comes to macro photography is lighting, lens diffraction, positioning, etc.
I have a Canon RF 100-400mm lens with a R50 camera body. I absolutely love it, mostly because it weighs so little, while still taking great photos. I had a heavier Olympus camera which I got based on forum recommendations but it was too heavy as I also carry binoculars. The total price was below your budget (varies based on used, new, and insured or not). I used this camera heavily during spring migration so I can attest it is good. The RF50 is a little small to hold sometimes but it is worth it for the weight. the difference between 4 (Olympus set tup) and 2 pounds is a lot. I also like the AF options on the RF50. I can switch through different modes from the spot focus for getting past branches to full screen for flying birds. I have also managed to use the 100-400 to photograph insects event though it is not what the lens is meant for.
This camera is great regardless of price. I do notice some limitations compared to the Olympus but the weight, full frame, good autofocus, and shutter speed make this a great camera. I do not know if the original user has gotten a camera but I hope this will help others. One thing I like is how it retains quality even when cropping. Cropping is a must for many small birds or birds far away.
Photos below marked as cropped or uncropped (this refers to the photo above the word).
), I personally keep mine at manual at all times.
