Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Mini Macro questions

Subject: [OM] Re: Mini Macro questions
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:40:59 -0700
Scott Peden wrote:
> Moose,
>
> Nice Pics. I get approximately that size when I have the Macro Lens on the
> 14-45 at 45 mm. It is smaller than that, like where you have this Orchid
> http://galleries.moosemystic.net/BlakeHouse0703/pages/_MG_0865fps.htm
>  but only one orchid. If that is a full sized pic, I could live with that as
> it does have field of depth.
>   
Not an orchid, a climbing vine with grape vine shaped leaves. The next 
two images are of the same plant, a seed pod, with the dead flower at 
the bottom right, and of a climbing tendril. The individual flowers are 
about 1/4 inch across, so the posted image is much greater than life size.
> Here is the page of Super Macros I posted to the <apparently> much disliked
> Flickr (though no one liked the free Kodak site at all and you can't blow
> much of anything up on my paid www.picturetrail.com/bigbasin  site)
> Lichens;
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/55838750@N00/sets/72157594514189976/
>
> The tooth pic is the ruler, it is 2 mm across.
> Note the loss of field of depth with the red lichens, though portions are
> very crisp.
>   
I don't know if I am not clearly communicating my ideas or if you just 
aren't interested. The common things about the Blake House images I 
posted are:

1. One camera body, one lens. No bellows, tubes, reversing rings. add on 
close-up lenses.

2. Hand held. I didn't realize you sometimes use a tripod. That would 
have improved some of my images.

3. All are crops, sometimes considerable crops, not frames filled with 
the subject.

4. Taken with a full frame sensor camera, so I had less DOF available 
than you do with 4/3.

5. 90/2.8 macro lens that focuses directly to 1:1

I've taken the liberty of doing some work on your lichen series from 
Flickr <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Peden/Macros/>.

They aren't as good as working with the originals would be, but I think 
they show some things:

1. E-500 images will stand up to considerable cropping.

2. Most of the limitations of the images seem to be due to issues of 
lens quality in  a use for which it wasn't designed, focus accuracy, DOF 
and/or motion blur issues.

3. Getting higher magnification is going to make the issues in #2 worse, 
not better. DOF gets worse, viewfinder gets dimmer, focus get more 
difficult.

Thus I suggest that you will get greater improvement in your results by 
dealing with the issues in #2 than by further efforts to increase the 
size of the images on the sensor.

Absent a change of camera and knowing that you have an EX-25 on the way, 
I really think you would serve your goal well by saving up some pennies 
for the DZ 50/2 macro. The 35/3.5 macro is cheaper and doesn't need the 
EX-25 to go to 1:1, but the 2 stops more speed will make a big 
difference in manual focus ease and accuracy. It will also have better 
stand-off distance from the subjects and probably a better lens overall.

E-500, EX-25, 50/2 macro and perhaps a ring light like just discussed 
and/or light tripod and you are all set to take great pics of your tiny 
flowers, lichen. etc. No fussing with all that other gear. Simple AF 
with many subjects. So the time to get each image goes down and you 
ability to get them without holding up your walks goes up.

Then when you upgrade to an E-510 next year, you get better resolution, 
anti shake to allow longer shutter speeds and easier focusing with live 
view.
> Many of the flowers I deal with are 1/2 an inch, 1/4th is pretty common,
> most people don't even notice them.
>   
Only a couple of the images I posted are of flowers over 1". Several are 
less than 1/2" and one 1/4" or less.
> When this one blooms, I want a much closer better shot than I got some years
> ago
> http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=1506749&uid=695857
>  this one is 1/10th of an inch.
>   
Looks familiar. Is the head sometimes bigger and made of more individual 
blooms?
> Boy is this site out of date, this is a small leaved Montia. This one is
> 1/4th of an inch
> http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=1363577&uid=695857
>   
Well, not really, a white azalea appears......
> Again, thanks for sharing your page, and thinking of me when you posted your
> very nice pics! 
Hey, you inspired me to do the little flowers.

Moose

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz