On 4/23/2011 11:05 PM, Jim Nichols wrote:
> Moose,
>
> Those are beautiful close-up shots, perfectly focused.
Thanks!
> One of my problems was that the wind was gusting, so I had to wait for it to
> die down, then try to focus and shoot.
An endless problem with outdoor flower shots. This one was in a relatively
sheltered spot, also shady. Thus the 800 ISO
to get 1/125 @ f11, to help stop subject motion and give me a little DOF
cushion.
As to focus, you can manually focus on a spot where the flower rests when the
breeze dies down. With pre-focus, you can
capture even a brief moment when it is there. There, I am very lucky, compared
to many others here my age and younger,
to have vision that allows me to accurately focus manually with DSLRs without
messing with special focusing screens, etc.
In a brighter spot, with high shutter speed, I have even caught focus by
shooting as the flower passes through the
selected focus spot. Tough, and takes patience and a tripod, though.
There are lots of other solutions I've seen or used:
1. In many places, including my home, it's usually still in the morning when
not stormy. A poor solution for night owl
Moose, though.
2. Some folks actually use "tents", light fabric and thin poles to hold it,
with open tops or only three sides.
3. Some carry a folding light shade-reflector and hand hold it to block breezes.
4. There are various gadgets that attach to camera or tripod, grip the stem and
hold it steady. I have a Wimberley
Plamp, although the end away from the tripod is different (And better for
flowers, I think.) than the one in this link.
<http://www.tripodhead.com/products/plamp-main.cfm> This image and the version
to its right show that it is quite
effective.
<http://galleries.moosemystic.net/MooseFoto/index.php?gallery=Miscellaneous/Images&image=3_MG_4484fpS7.jpg>
5. There are simple, metal plant stakes bent into a ring at the top, with an
opening for the stems. Light and easy to
carry along, perhaps taped to a tripod leg, they can greatly limit flower
movement when used to hold the stem in tension.
> I'm not sure that my tripod, which is over 50 years old, would have been much
> help.
If it holds the camera steady, why not? The old wooden ones are actually pretty
good at damping vibrations. The big
advantages of my new one are lightness combined with solidity and speed and
flexibility of setup.
> I have tried using a long lens for close-ups, and have obtained a few decent
> images that way. But I usually prefer to use a macro when I can.
Obviously, that's the ideal solution. Yet in the field, on hillsides, in
gullies, trying to work around other stuff, and
so on, getting the set-up, while also trying to get decent image size and
framing with a fixed focal length lens just
adds difficulty and time. In my yard, or a local park, sure. When tramping
around in the wild, as with these shots . . .
I have an excellent 90/2.8 macro lens for the 5D, but sometimes it isn't the
answer to situations.
And then again, there are long lenses and there are long lenses. Some lend
themselves to C-U work, while others aren't
that good for it. Lets face it, that minimum focusing distance is there for a
reason. Even if the original design reason
was not optical, it gave the optical designers some freedom to optimize lens
quality in other areas by being able to
ignore IQ at closer distances.
Even the wonderful 135/4.5 Zuiko macro isn't recommended by Oly to be used past
1:2 (0.5x). So sure, some long MF lenses
work pretty well with extension, but it's not the ideal solution.
Zooms are a different story. Most MF zooms with close focus capability reached
maximum magnification at their widest
settings, hardly ideal for wildflower hunting. A few (no Zuikos, as I recall)
were designed with max mag at the long
end.. I've got at lest one each of Tokina, Kiron and Tamron MF zooms where that
is the case.
With contemporary, very complex and sophisticated zooms with multiple aspheric
and special very high and low dispersion
glasses ,some high ratio zooms maintain the same minimum focal distances from
wide to tele, so tele gives maximum
magnification. Where that focal distance is part of the lens design, and
especially with subjects where only center
sharpness matters, they can be very good.
Using an excellent, old 300 mm MF lens with extension for close-ups and a
modern zoom at 300 mm may give very different
results - and the zoom may well win.
Zoomy Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
