E-mail: Password: Create an Account Recover password

About Authors Contacts Get involved Русская версия

show

Photocameras

Community and ForumInsects photoshootingPhotocameras

Pages: 1 ...4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12... 42

28.03.2013 12:07, Bianor

Hierophis, I repeat, I sincerely believed that this topic is an exchange of experience, that people share techniques and methods for obtaining images of insects, but alas, I was wrong. I've already apologized for getting into the group monologue "better a lousy picture than no one" with my boring technical reasoning and breaking the idyll.

As for the open spaces, here as they say, user posted image

28.03.2013 12:27, Hierophis

By the way, barry wrote his messages exactly in this vein, and the nozzle(macro converter, well, or just a nozzle lens)- this is a real, easy way to expand the capabilities of your existing camera, up to almost a microframework.

But it is better if you just have to buy a simple photo app, take care of the presence of a macro mode, especially like "supermacro" - when you can take macro photos from a close distance using zoom - this is an analog of a macro attachment.

But drunkenness-fight wink.gif

This post was edited by Hierophis - 03/28/2013 12: 28

28.03.2013 12:35, Bianor

I mean the same thing. Here no one is interested in improving the quality of the photo, no one bothers soap, noise, chromaticity, crooked color and other shortcomings - there is a photo, so it's already good. You don't need to hang it on the wall, but it will do for everything else.

28.03.2013 12:44, Hierophis

I need interseno!!! Bianor, how can I improve the quality and expand the capabilities of my camera without going to the store for a DSLR and a set of lenses? barry mentioned this possibility, but what is your option? wink.gif

28.03.2013 12:52, Bianor

Create a new theme. In this situation, I don't want to answer any more.

30.03.2013 21:42, headshotboy

19.04.2013 21:05, collector

Guys,
please tell me without scientific debate-what kind of camera to buy for poster and natural macro.

19.04.2013 22:40, headshotboy

Any of them shuffle.gif
The only thing - generally speaking, crop is considered more convenient for macro, and the two leading systems on the photo market give you more freedom to choose optics and all sorts of bells and whistles.
And so-equally.
Canon has the most versatile system mount and an awesome MP-E65.
Nikon has excellent whale optics, and in the top - end glasses there are wonderful micro-lenses.
In terms of the amount , it doesn't matter.

This post was edited by headshotboy - 04/19/2013 22: 41

19.04.2013 23:13, Bad Den

"Byada-byada-chagrin" - my whale lens on the Canon 450D died. I was puzzled by the question: should I buy the kit again, or should I still take it with more advanced functionality (but without fanaticism)? If the second option - which one should I prefer (there is a macro lens separately)?

19.04.2013 23:22, rhopalocera.com

"Byada-byada-chagrin" - my whale lens on the Canon 450D died. I was puzzled by the question: should I buy the kit again, or should I still take it with more advanced functionality (but without fanaticism)? If the second option - which one should I prefer (there is a macro lens separately)?


there are decent inexpensive EF-S lenses significantly better than the whale one, especially recommend this SIGMA AF18-250mm F3. 5-6. 3 DC OS HSM for Canon
Likes: 2

20.04.2013 11:06, Wave Storm

"Byada-byada-chagrin" - my whale lens on the Canon 450D died. I was puzzled by the question: should I buy the kit again, or should I still take it with more advanced functionality (but without fanaticism)? If the second option - which one should I prefer (there is a macro lens separately)?

Bad Den, do you shoot everything except macro on kitovy? It's just that I also have a macro lens and a whale lens, but I don't really like the quality of the whale images, but are you satisfied with the whale lens? Or maybe you need to dig into the settings?

This post was edited by Wave Storm - 04/20/2013 11: 07

20.04.2013 12:50, KingSnake

The Sony a57 has a great whale lens. It is suitable for both everyday shooting and macro shooting. Previously, there was a sony a330-the whale is generally a name and a misunderstanding, but this one is very pleasing.

Pictures:
DSC00373.jpg
DSC00373.jpg — (291.73к)

DSC00405.jpg
DSC00405.jpg — (286.12к)

DSC00086.JPG
DSC00086.JPG — (4.03мб)

DSC00283.JPG
DSC00283.JPG — (3.63мб)

20.04.2013 15:27, Bad Den

  Bad Den, do you shoot everything except macro on kitovy? It's just that I also have a macro lens and a whale lens, but I don't really like the quality of the whale images, but are you satisfied with the whale lens? Or maybe you need to dig into the settings?

Kitovy completely satisfied me - "I'm not a real welder!!!" smile.gif
Likes: 1

20.04.2013 16:00, Svyatoslav Knyazev

Kitovy completely satisfied me - "I'm not a real welder!!!" smile.gif

maybe then the whale repair is simple? ))

20.04.2013 20:00, Bad Den

maybe then the whale repair is simple? ))

It's cheaper to buy a new one. But on the other hand, I want an even more versatile lens.
Likes: 1

20.04.2013 21:28, Garricos

Hello! I have such a question. There is equipment in the amount of two microscopes - MBS-10 and OGME-PZ. I don't really know much about photography myself, but now I need a device that allows me to shoot under these microscopes. I asked in stores - there seem to be two types. One is when the microscope is partially disassembled, a kind of adapter is inserted there, to which the camera is connected(like Zenith, etc.). The other, more simple, is when an adapter with a small digital camera is inserted instead of one eyepiece.
As far as I understand, the first option is either outdated, or requires an expensive camera and is more suitable for some super-pros. And accordingly, I was more interested in the second option, where instead of an eyepiece.

Can someone tell me how best to choose? I need high-quality photos that allow me to make out the details, but I don't need to make a poster out of these photos, the size of the entire wall. Also, if possible, I would like to adapt the video somehow. Thank You

20.04.2013 21:33, Peter Khramov

It's cheaper to buy a new one. But on the other hand, I want an even more versatile lens.
If the dough is not a pity — EFS 15-85. If it's a pity, but the whale was EFS 18-55 of the first version (i.e. without a stub), take the second one — it's better, although the design is just as shitty as the first one. If money is a pity, but the kit was already the second, then again the second, if you only need a picture or EFS 17-85, if the design and long end are more important than just a picture.
Likes: 1

21.04.2013 18:59, Wave Storm

I have an EFS 18-55 IS II Kit.

Yesterday I used it to shoot the landscapes that are available in the in this report. Generally satisfied, because I expected it to be much worse.

And one more photo from yesterday with this lens:
1_IMG_0488.JPG

This post was edited by Wave Storm - 04/21/2013 19: 03
Likes: 1

21.04.2013 20:28, Alexandr Zhakov

I have an EFS 18-55 IS II Kit.
Yesterday I used it to shoot the landscapes that are available in the in this report. Generally satisfied, because I expected it to be much worse.
And one more photo from yesterday with this lens:

I didn't know that using a whale lens, you can take photos like in the report. A topic for reflection.
smile.gif
Likes: 1

22.04.2013 16:19, amara

I didn't know that using a whale lens, you can take photos like in the report. A topic for reflection.
smile.gif


The images of objects that are not landscapes (!) in this report were taken in my opinion with a special Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens.But in comparison with them, the quality of images with landscapes where kityaka was used does not look very impressive, sorry.
And secondly, this size (of a New Year's card) should NEVER be used to judge the quality of a picture.

Among whale lenses, there may be quite good ones (such as the Panasonic 14-45), but a lens purchased separately on the advice of experienced people, and naturally more expensive, will easily surpass it even for an inexperienced eye.
The main thing is to watch and compare them in a large format. And in a small one, like a card, most lenses and cameras (!) will look very attractive.

This post was edited by amara - 22.04.2013 16: 32

22.04.2013 16:29, amara

I have an EFS 18-55 IS II Kit.

Yesterday I used it to shoot the landscapes that are available in the in this report. Generally satisfied, because I expected it to be much worse.

And one more photo from yesterday with this lens:
[attachmentid()=170416]


I wonder why my EKSIF shows that this picture was taken by Tamron 90mm f/2.8?

22.04.2013 18:01, Wave Storm

The images of objects that are not landscapes (!) in this report were taken in my opinion with a special Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens.But in comparison with them, the quality of images with landscapes where kityaka was used does not look very impressive, sorry.
And secondly, this size (of a New Year's card) should NEVER be used to judge the quality of a picture.

Yes, it's true, the landscapes are made by a whale, and the plants with insects are made by a tamron. The whale is not so clear.
There are still some places where the sky needs to be made darker, and the greenery in the beam is brighter.

22.04.2013 18:11, Wave Storm

I wonder why my EKZIF shows that this picture was taken by Tamron 90mm f/2.8?

I'm sorry, I got it all mixed up. I just remember that Kit also photographed this weevil, but then deleted it.

So here are other pictures of the whale full size:

IMG_0483.JPG

IMG_0785.JPG

22.04.2013 19:18, Alexandr Zhakov

Then everything is correct, if the DSLR, then the lens should be taken separately.

22.04.2013 20:03, amara

Then everything is correct, if the DSLR, then the lens should be taken separately.


Yes, this one with a stub (IS) is better than the one without a stub.

21.02.2015 17:03, Wave Storm

I have a question like this, dear molbiolovtsy.

Who shoots butterflies from their hands at what focal length?

I came to the conclusion that at the time of day when they are active, it is more convenient to shoot them with a focal length that is not very large, about 90 mm, and maybe less, because it is easier to keep track of insects flying back and forth at this distance. And with a focal length of about 150 mm, it is not always possible to immediately find an insect in the viewfinder, you need to aim more accurately.

21.02.2015 19:30, okoem

I shoot with a 100mm macro lens.
Likes: 1

21.02.2015 20:15, Kharkovbut

I shoot with a 100mm macro lens.
Same.
Likes: 1

22.02.2015 6:51, Diogen

And I weave, and with hands. I have an old hundred square meters (without stub), I'm going to change everything to a new one. But I got used to the old one, and for many years I've been thinking: do I need it?
Likes: 1

23.02.2015 15:34, Svyatoslav Knyazev

I also have an old macro weave. I do not plan to change to a new L-ku.
Likes: 1

23.02.2015 17:28, Bianor

user posted image

user posted image

user posted image
Likes: 1

23.02.2015 18:17, Wave Storm

Bianor, what is your focus field?

23.02.2015 18:23, Wave Storm

Here are photos I took in June 2014 with a Canon EF-S 18-55 IS II lens.

As for me, he shoots quite well. It just can't focus as close as a macro lens. Of course, it's worse than a macro lens, but in the middle of the day, such focal distances are convenient.

IMG_8718_2.jpg
IMG_8757_2.jpg
IMG_8863.jpg

This post was edited by Wave Storm - 02/23/2015 18: 25

23.02.2015 19:37, Bianor

Bianor, what is your focus field?

Trash fifty kopecks-Vega-11U and I-50-2

And this is the antediluvian Sigma 18-125:

user posted image
Likes: 1

24.02.2015 17:10, Peter Khramov


I came to the conclusion that at the time of day when they are active, it is more convenient to shoot them with a focal length that is not very large, about 90 mm, and maybe less, because it is easier to keep track of insects flying back and forth at this distance. And with a focal length of about 150 mm, it is not always possible to immediately find an insect in the viewfinder, you need to aim more accurately.
First, the same FR on FF and on crop have two big differences. There was a time when 100mm on FF was considered wow as cool, long, and difficult to focus on. And right now, after all, according to the crop, the question is already between 100 and 150, right, I understand?..
If on the crop. Just during the day, when they are active, you need more FR, because it can be difficult to get close to them (this is not in the morning in the dew and not in the evening on the screen, yeah). I.e. the last thought that came to me regarding macro lenses is an ordinary 300 mm telephoto without any macro:--)
But yes, in the viewfinder doesn't always track you down. In very clinical cases, I just open my left eye. I use my left hand to look at the butterfly in front of the camera, and my right hand to stare through the viewfinder. This may sound a little wild, but those who, for example, have drawn an image from a microscope (at biofacs, they regularly do this at botany/zoology, well, or have done it before), know that this is quite possible.
But in general, yes. Thoughts of a long zoom complete with reinox also have the right to envy.
Likes: 1

24.02.2015 20:16, Wave Storm

25.02.2015 7:00, Ele-W

I have a question like this, dear molbiolovtsy.

Who shoots butterflies from their hands at what focal length?


Fix 90 mm (Tamron 90mm f/2.8 SP AF Di Macro Lens) on FF (Nikon D700) + built-in flash with a diffuser. If it's sunny, then you can do it without a flash.
Likes: 1

19.03.2016 19:37, Hierophis

Odessa13, you can ask questions about how to make friends with a DSLR and macro photography with a used good GRIP here smile.gif

And while I'm still in the cold, I decided to slightly improve my pribluda for macro shooting to Olympus SP510UZ.

I liked the first final version of the macro lens more or less, the distortion was eliminated, but at the same time the GRIP fell very much, even at the aperture of 8(the maximum for this soap dish) nothing good.

Here on these two full-frame photos, you can estimate the GRIP, where the ktyr is the minimum aperture - the horse is the maximum.

Pictures:
picture: P3130450.jpg
P3130450.jpg — (373.19 k)

picture: P3130354.jpg
P3130354.jpg — (401.28к)

19.03.2016 19:40, Hierophis

To refine it, I bought an I-11M 300mm object for $ 3, slightly modified it with a file for crossing with Olympus and the previous lens, while I photographed a couple of midges at home-vrod more or less, this is at the minimum aperture, the size of the midge is 1.5 mm.
+ increased MDF, marble floor photographed from 50 cm, previously it was about 40, which should have an even better effect on the appearance of shy animals.

This post was edited by Hierophis - 19.03.2016 19: 43

Pictures:
picture: P3190606.jpg
P3190606.jpg — (377.05к)

picture: P3190579.jpg
P3190579.jpg — (496.19к)

20.03.2016 14:24, ИНО

I didn't understand: but what about all those "aspherical elements", "negative menisci" and other "heavy R & D" - in the trash?

Weight-665 g, wow! And Pan also claimed that 100 g. for his kayaks - end-to-end. I can't believe that he was able to make this lens so much easier with the help of a "file refinement". In terms of aberration compensation, of course, it turned out better, but the increase in resolution is not noticeable at all compared to the homemade one. But there is a noticeable strong ventilation (in the photo with tariq), and in one corner more than in the rest. This suggests that the optical axes are not aligned from the word at all.

But thanks to Pan for finding such a topic, where the discussion of photographic equipment will not be offtopic.

P.S. I didn't notice it when I first read it:

Pages: 1 ...4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12... 42

New comment

Note: you should have a Insecta.pro account to upload new topics and comments. Please, create an account or log in to add comments.

* Our website is multilingual. Some comments have been translated from other languages.

Random species of the website catalog

Insecta.pro: international entomological community. Terms of use and publishing policy.

Project editor in chief and administrator: Peter Khramov.

Curators: Konstantin Efetov, Vasiliy Feoktistov, Svyatoslav Knyazev, Evgeny Komarov, Stan Korb, Alexander Zhakov.

Moderators: Vasiliy Feoktistov, Evgeny Komarov, Dmitriy Pozhogin, Alexandr Zhakov.

Thanks to all authors, who publish materials on the website.

© Insects catalog Insecta.pro, 2007—2024.

Species catalog enables to sort by characteristics such as expansion, flight time, etc..

Photos of representatives Insecta.

Detailed insects classification with references list.

Few themed publications and a living blog.