Dave,
Just got some macro shots back, myself. Taken with the 80/4 and a 135/2.8 on
the telescoping extension tube, however, not the 50/3.5. I'm having similar
problems with depth of field. I suspect that's an issue of practice, more
than anything. I'm about to try a different screen than the standard 1-13
that I was too lazy to change out for this first effort. Maybe the 1-4 or
1-10, as I don't have a 2-anything to try.
Also, my shots were taken with the OM-4T in automatic, and in some cases
with the T-10 Ring flash in use. I also notice some wash-out on lighter
portions. Hopefully I'll find out in scanning the negs later whether that's
the printer at Costco or me/camera/flash. I'll try and get them up on my
site in the next few days.
I took a look at your pics and they look pretty good to me as far as focus
goes. It looks as if you probably could have benefited from a fill flash of
some sort on the red one.
I am curious about one thing though. There's not much contrast in either
image. Scanner? Development? I doubt it's a lens issue is why I'm
wondering...
---
Scott Gomez
-----Original Message-----
From: DAVDOU9211@xxxxxxx [mailto:DAVDOU9211@xxxxxxx]
Subject: [OM] Re: First Efforts with 50/3.5 Macro
I just got back some prints of shots I did in Balboa Park. These were shot
on Gold 200, OM-2, Auto Mode.
I am still learning about the depth of field ( or lack of it) in Macro
shots.
Practice will help alot. I also find that when I use the depth of field
preview the image becomes so dim that I can't really see it.
<stuff snipped>
Thanks,
Dave Dougherty
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|