New to photography....

[Lee Hurrell]

Eccles, you might be right:

Cheers
Lee

[Lee Hurrell]

So while I was out on Saturday I found a subject somewhat more stationary than a butterfly to play around with f stops with:

F8, 1/400, ISO 400, 85mm, partial metering, -2/3 exposed, no flash, handheld

F22, 1/50, ISO 400, 85mm, partial metering, -2/3 exposed, no flash, handheld

For some reason I thought the depth of field in the second shot would be behind the main point of focus, but is both in front AND behind. I know the thistle makes it look really busy, but which is better?

I'll keep playing around....

Cheers

Lee

[Pete Eeles]

I think the first is better and, based on my experience, using a 1/50 shutter speed handheld (for me) is a non-starter. Could be my age and shaking limbs

Cheers,

- Pete

[Lee Hurrell]

Thanks Pete. I was in AV mode so didn't control the shutter speed. But now you say it isn't as clear focus as the first shot.

I'll keep practising different with different scenarios and conditions.

Cheers

Lee

[NickB]

So while I was out on Saturday....... For some reason I thought the depth of field in the second shot would be behind the main point of focus, but is both in front AND behind. I know the thistle makes it look really busy, but which is better?
Cheers
Lee

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori ... -field.htm

Indeed - at the focal point, there is an area both in-front and behind that is sharp and in-focus.
With a macro lens this area is quite small, resulting in the out-of-focus backgrounds that you see in much of the work here. Those that use a large prime with tubes and/or supplementary lens to magnify the image tend to get less blurring of the background depending on the type of shot taken....

N

[Zonda]

Are you focusing manually or auto. I find that with small subjects like a ladybird you really need extension tubes, and that auto focus just ain't good enough. Auto focus and the larger butterflies sometimes works, but smaller species calls for manual focus. I am coming to the conclusion that if the antennae are sharp, then the head may be, so i take multiple shots around that point. The smaller the butterfly, the less depth of field you have to work with. Stick the camera on 4 or 5 frames per second, at f11, iso 200, vary the focusing around the head, or antennae, and on a bright day,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,away you go. If it's really bright, you may be able to go to f16, and that gives you even more depth of field to play with. Camera support is also of paramount importance. I use a monopod at the very least.

[Pete Eeles]

I find that with small subjects like a ladybird you really need extension tubes

That depends on the lens.

and that auto focus just ain't good enough.

It's certainly more difficult for small subjects, or when the subject lies outside an autofocusing point.

Auto focus and the larger butterflies sometimes works, but smaller species calls for manual focus.

Again, I'd say it depends on the lens and the position of the subject in relation to an autofocusing point

The smaller the butterfly, the less depth of field you have to work with.

If you assume that you're trying to get the same amount of area filled with the butterfly, then that's true.

Stick the camera on 4 or 5 frames per second, at f11, iso 200, vary the focusing around the head, or antennae, and on a bright day,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,away you go. If it's really bright, you may be able to go to f16, and that gives you even more depth of field to play with.

I always shoot with shutter priority when handheld since the biggest cause of out-of-focus images is me! And also stay at or below ISO 400, otherwise the shots are too grainy. I then live with whatever aperture I get.

These days, though, I mostly use a tripod (and manual focus)

Cheers,

- Pete

[Zonda]

? Ok ,,, any questions on photography should now be directed at Pete. obviously my technique is failing. Sorry if i have mislead any beginners. However, i agree with some of his points. My advice was based on an slr and a 105mm macro. Sorry for any mis-Information. I am not about to answer every point,, sorry. I hope we haven't confused a beginner.

[NickB]

...... Stick the camera on 4 or 5 frames per second, at f11, iso 200, vary the focusing around the head, or antennae, and on a bright day,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,away you go. If it's really bright, you may be able to go to f16, and that gives you even more depth of field to play with.

Agree that should use ISO200 where possible; f11 is on the edge of my f-stop range.....and I do use bursts of shots with auto-focus, but try to use different areas of the butterfly (front-middle for example) to focus on (in the hope of gettting ONE that may have everything you need in focus). With more d-o-f at apertures around f16, sharpness of the whole image may suffer as a result - it is a compromise all round
Whatever works for you....
N

[Zonda]

i agree

[Denise]

Agree that should use ISO200 where possible; f11 is on the edge of my f-stop range.., but try to use different areas of the butterfly (front-middle for example) to focus on (in the hope of getting ONE that may have everything you need in focus).
Whatever works for you....
N

I'm so glad that I'm not the only one that does this. I try for the eyes first, but on a moving butterfly I do the for-mentioned.

Denise

[NickB]

...on BIG butterflies like Frits, Admirals & Emperors, I try this technique more.....tho' generally I am aiming at (tho' not always getting ) the head and both antennae in focus. I may vary my distance to try to achieve this - step back and crop more - to get more of the butterfly in focus with my 90mm & TC. (Can't wait to try-out my 200m on the bigger beasts next year...)
N

[Lee Hurrell]

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori ... -field.htm

Nick, brilliant, thanks that's very helpful.

Are you focusing manually or auto.

Always manual. I did start using auto but as you say, only really works on bigger butterflies, for me anyway. I've yet to get my monopod, I was outbid! And don't worry, I'm not too confused

I've also come to the conclusion that eyes and antenna are the way to go. I was playing around with white balancing with a Large White in my garden and as I was able to get fairly close I was aiming at the eyes and was quite pleased with the results - photos to follow when I get home.

Agree that should use ISO200 where possible; f11 is on the edge of my f-stop range

I've been using mainly ISO400 and F8, I will try ISO200 for a few and see. I can see from all your comments that the aperture will need to change when the Sigma macro lens comes on board!

I always shoot with shutter priority when handheld

Sorry Pete, what's shutter priority, is that the same as the AV mode I currently use?

Thanks all,

Lee

[Lee Hurrell]

Pete - I looked it up, (Wikipedia knows best).

Shutter Priority is the opposite of what I currently do (choose the aperture and the camera sets the shutter speed).

If you don't mind me asking, how come you do it that way, and what do you base your choice of shutter speed on?

Thanks

Lee

[Pete Eeles]

I do it that way because, when using handheld, I personally need a shutter speed of 1/125s or faster. Based on experience in the field, I know that the subject will be "soft" at slower speeds. However, I always keep an eye on the aperture achieved and if I'm going to get more depth of field than I would like (e.g. I want a blurred background), then I will use an even faster shutter speed until I get the aperture I want. This, however, normally requires either a very bright day or the use of a flash.

Having said that, I'm one of many photographers on this site that almost exclusively use a monopod or tripod. I don't think I've taken a single handheld shot this year. That's for 2 reasons. The first is that I have all the record shots I could ever want The second is that I'm more interested in image quality than anything else these days. Sure I miss quite a few shots while setting the tripod up, but the images are much better. I can then use aperture priority and it doesn't matter what shutter speed I get (in general) because I've got a stable platform (unless the subject is moving!).

Cheers,

- Pete

[Dave McCormick]

Having said that, I'm one of many photographers on this site that almost exclusively use a monopod or tripod. I don't think I've taken a single handheld shot this year. That's for 2 reasons. The first is that I have all the record shots I could ever want The second is that I'm more interested in image quality than anything else these days. Sure I miss quite a few shots while setting the tripod up, but the images are much better. I can then use aperture priority and it doesn't matter what shutter speed I get (in general) because I've got a stable platform (unless the subject is moving!).

Same here. I have always used a monopod/tripod whenever I am out, except about 3 times this year. I am just trying to get good shots now that I have photographed all the species where I live and to get 100% quality, to me a tripod/monopod is better because I have noticed, in handheld, you can move slightly and unfocus the camera, whereas on tripod its stationary and unless the subject moves, you have no problem of that and it stops any shake too.

I usually shoot on AV mode so I can get my subject all in focus or blur out the background etc... but usually as you said, unless its a sunny day or using flash, I always use a monopod/tripod for that.

One thing I have had a bit of troube with is metering. Multi spot metering is usually good by my DSLR does not have that it has: Evaluative, Partial, spot and Center-Weighed Metering. So does anyone know when the best time to use what metering is?

[Zonda]

Everyone has a slightly different technique, it's finding one that suits you, and gives you the results you are happy with. Having said that, i'm almost never happy, there's always something that could be better. I use centre weighted metering, set on a medium sized catchment area, hardly ever alter it.

[Zonda]

Just like to add, that using the 4 or 5 fps on the antennae and head area, does make for a lot of images. I can shoot just two species of butterfly, and end up with 150 pics. These are sorted on the computer,,,never in the camera, and most are deleted. I get around 10% that are usable. So out of the 150 originals, i'd probably end up with around seven pics of each species. Then i will pick the best of them, and it might be 5 or 6 i keep.... 6 pics out of 150, well that's digital.

[eccles]

I rarely use manual focus, preferring to use the AF points and do a minimal crop for framing afterwards. I handhold except with a longer lens because of its weight in which case I use a monopod. I am happy to use iso400 because the quality loss is minimal. I sometimes use the onboard flash but am rarely happy with the results except for minimal fill-in with backlit shots. As already said, how best to obtain good photos depends on your shooting style which you need to develop with practice, but it also depends on your kit as well, kit including the camera, lens, and most of all yourself!
The latter is the prime reason why any new serious camera purchase should be handled before buying. A person with very small hands might not like some of the middle and top models as some of these are pretty chunky. Similarly, a person with large hands may find some of the more recent entry level DSLRs just too small to be able to hold steady. A 'wrong' camera for you may mean a lot more disappointing shots than a 'right' one simply because you cannot hold it comfortably. There are some fabulous shots posted on this board taken with an array of different models and makes, and not all are DSLRs either. It's the photo that's the thing.
Mike.

[NickB]

... 6 pics out of 150...

That's a good ratio...
N