Dyxum website
Filter posts
|
Page 123 15> |
Bugs and Spiders (14)| Author | |
Micholand 
Admin Group 
Knowledgebase Contributor Joined: 30 October 2005 Country: Germany Location: MUC Status: Offline Posts: 19538 |
 Topic: Bugs and Spiders (14)Posted: 18 June 2013 at 20:31 |
|
Welcome to part 14 of "Bugs and Spiders..."
|
|
 |
|
|
slo.Metallc
Senior Member 
Joined: 04 October 2011 Country: Slovenia Location: Velenje Status: Offline Posts: 504 |
Posted: 18 June 2013 at 21:12 |
|
I’am really inspired by Lagrimon’s photos that he takes with his A-580 and Minolta 200mm APO at ISO 1600 and with natural light. So I went and try to do it with A200 and the results are catastrophic… even with ISO800. Too much noise and huge detail loss (or am I doing something wrong?!?).
Well at least I spotted this little fellow at my doors when I got home. So I picked my flash and Raynox DCR250 adapter and made few “portraits”. Still a lot of noise… but this topic deserves to be opened with such a cosy little creature… #001 Jumping Spider  Aperture: f/16.0 | Exposure Time: 0.008 sec (1/125) | ISO: 400 #002 Jumping Spider  Aperture: f/16.0 | Exposure Time: 0.008 sec (1/125) | ISO: 200 Jumping Spider  Aperture: f/16.0 | Exposure Time: 0.008 sec (1/125) | ISO: 200 All taken with A200 and Tamron 90mm F2.8 coupled with Raynox DCR250 adapter and of course heavily cropped. Edited by slo.Metallc - 18 June 2013 at 21:17 |
|
|
How small is small?
Well, if it's bigger than 23x16mm, then it is huge! |
|
|
|
|
Leike1
Newbie 
Joined: 18 August 2009 Location: Netherlands Status: Offline Posts: 31 |
Posted: 18 June 2013 at 21:22 |
|
|
|
MichelvA
Alpha Eyes group 
Knowledge Base Contributor Joined: 26 April 2008 Country: Netherlands Status: Offline Posts: 20996 |
Posted: 18 June 2013 at 21:47 |
The 580 is a much newer camera, which likely results in a lower noiselevel. A good noise reduction software can do the rest. But these last shots look very good to me anyway. It almost looks as if the spider wears orange sunglasses. For me you do it right, not wrong 
|
|
|
|
|
Lagrimon
Senior Member
Joined: 14 January 2010 Country: Spain Location: Canary islands Status: Offline Posts: 174 |
Posted: 18 June 2013 at 22:01 |
|
Thank you Gregor, I'm glad to push some more interest in macro discipline
 I must say that when i had the A350, i could only push ISO up to 400 in order to keep IQ and acceptable noise, so I'm very happy with the A580 high isos. I always use the Topaz plugin, to process my pics. I really like its results. Anyways the close you get to 1:1, the harder becomes to keep dof with natural light, (assuming you don't use a tripod), jumping spiders are hard subjects, small and nervous usually, so they are better done with flash, but a good diffuser is almost a must, as their eyes are so reflective, and the ground so close to them. Hope this all is of some use to you. I dedicate you this one, shot back in 2010 with my A350, an old Vivitar for Oly 24mm 2.8 reversed, ISO 400, and natural light, camera partially resting on the floor.  Cheers! 
|
|
|
Macroine addicted, not natural to english language.
|
|
|
|
|
mhohner
Senior Member
Joined: 14 October 2006 Country: Germany Status: Offline Posts: 1724 |
Posted: 18 June 2013 at 22:48 |
|
@slo.Metallc:
That's a male Euophrys frontalis, in case you're interested. |
|
|
Sony/Minolta F.A.Q., bodies, lenses, flashes.
|
|
|
|
|
slo.Metallc
Senior Member
Joined: 04 October 2011 Country: Slovenia Location: Velenje Status: Offline Posts: 504 |
Posted: 18 June 2013 at 23:54 |
|
Well Michele I am glad that you like them. They were taken with flash so the results are pretty much ok when it comes to noise. But those shots from field that I took at ISO 800 are horrible… at least JPEG’s. Didn’t have time to check RAW’s yet. Probably Topaz denoise would do magic…
@David: When I saw yours Promachus latitarsatus and those praying mantises that you took handheld in natural light I was simply astonished. I never dare to go over ISO 200 on my A200 when I am doing macro. I always use flash and a huge homemade diffusor for macro so I never imagine one could make such great results in pure natural light. But today I left my flash at home and went out to see what will happen. And the results told me what everyone already knows – don’t go over ISO 400 with A200. But my main goal with today’s photo trip was to convince myself again that macro with A200 above ISO 400 and F11 handheld and without flash is an utopic idea… So I am buying A77 in next two weeks. I am convincing myself about this for past three months. I saved enough money long time ago but never had the “guts” to actually upgrade. I know my pictures won’t look like yours just because I will buy new camera. It takes practice and tons of missed shots to get to there. But I still believe that upgrading from A200 to A77 will have certain benefits for me. And I think I can have an upgrade every 5 years...  But until then A200 will have to do… #001 Random bug  Camera: DSLR-A200 | Lens: Tamron 90mm F2.8 Macro | Focal Length: 90 mm | Aperture: f/14.0 | Exposure Time: 0.008 sec (1/125) | ISO: 100 #002 I really should learn to name thise things...  Camera: DSLR-A200 | Lens: Tamron 90mm F2.8 Macro | Focal Length: 90 mm | Aperture: f/16.0 | Exposure Time: 0.008 sec (1/125) | ISO: 200 #003 Drinking the nectar  Camera: DSLR-A200 | Lens: Tamron 90mm F2.8 Macro | Focal Length: 90 mm | Aperture: f/16.0 | Exposure Time: 0.008 sec (1/125) | ISO: 200 Edited by slo.Metallc - 18 June 2013 at 23:57 |
|
|
How small is small?
Well, if it's bigger than 23x16mm, then it is huge! |
|
|
|
|
slo.Metallc
Senior Member
Joined: 04 October 2011 Country: Slovenia Location: Velenje Status: Offline Posts: 504 |
Posted: 18 June 2013 at 23:55 |
Thanks Michael, I never took time to learn the names of creatures that wanders around my house so I'm always glad when someone actually knows their names. |
|
|
How small is small?
Well, if it's bigger than 23x16mm, then it is huge! |
|
|
|
|
VictorV
Senior Member
Joined: 09 March 2009 Country: Russian Federation Location: Sakhalin Island Status: Offline Posts: 1458 |
Posted: 19 June 2013 at 02:13 |
|
Meloe proscarabaeus
  A900 + Sigma 180/5,6 macro |
|
|
|
|
Lagrimon
Senior Member
Joined: 14 January 2010 Country: Spain Location: Canary islands Status: Offline Posts: 174 |
Posted: 20 June 2013 at 03:08 |
|
@Gregor
I bet you'll be very happy with A77, its high resolution and focus peaking must be great for macro (I wish i could try one but is hard to find a Sony user here in the islands...  ), and I think is a BIG step ahead from A200. BTW, those are nice shots, great details!Looking at my old pictures with the A350, I found I kept just one, shot at iso 800 without flash, so I guess this is the best I could do in such conditions. I shot it with the Mino 100 and Kenko 2x late in the evening, thats why I had to push iso so high, I was happy at the moment with the result, today I would delete it  . Sony A350, Minolta 100mm f2.8 macro, Kenko 2x, 1/100, f/10, ISO 800, handheld, natural light. Ovbiously it had no quality to do a big version. |
|
|
Macroine addicted, not natural to english language.
|
|
|
|
|
kerrath
Senior Member
Joined: 07 July 2012 Country: United States Location: LowerCalifornia Status: Offline Posts: 1672 |
Posted: 21 June 2013 at 05:26 |
|
That raynox adapter is actually really impressing me with its image quality. Any idea how it compares with reverse lens?
 Here's one from today. My cheapo 8" chinese round diffuser arrived today and I thought I'd go give it a test. I wasn't planning to do anything serious, but I found this very cooperative jumping spider. There are other photos where the eyes are more in focus, but I preferred the pose of this one. This spider was finishing up eating a very small black ant when I found it. We don't have big jumpers around here. I was using a Soligor 24mm lens on around 45mm extension tubes/adapters. I decided a round diffuser would give a more natural looking reflection in the insects' eyes. I've also decided side light looks more pleasant, so I'll be migrating my flash (5400hs) to the side of my camera for future macro stuff. |
|
|
|
|
MichelvA
Alpha Eyes group
Knowledge Base Contributor Joined: 26 April 2008 Country: Netherlands Status: Offline Posts: 20996 |
Posted: 21 June 2013 at 08:50 |
|
You did very well here Craig. Lovely shot of a cute little spider. Or maybe it's just a little monster (from the ant's point of view).
|
|
|
|
|
beardedspoooon
Senior Member
Joined: 18 December 2012 Country: United States Location: Columbia, SC Status: Offline Posts: 731 |
Posted: 21 June 2013 at 18:04 |
|
The more I mess with macro cheaply, the more I want to spend money on macro gear.
Below is not the greatest, spider shot with a reverse mounted MD 50mm 1.7, onboard flash.  Here's an 800x800 crop (she's an attractive lady):  Edited by beardedspoooon - 21 June 2013 at 18:14 |
|
|
|
|
IA
Senior Member
Joined: 16 September 2008 Location: Greece Status: Offline Posts: 468 |
Posted: 22 June 2013 at 01:15 |
    
|
|
|
|
Topic Options
slo.Metallc wrote:
 > Forum Home > Dyxum Photographs > Themed Views
|
Page 123 15> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.
Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania
Feel free to contact us if needed.