Some Available Light Shots

[Lester Wareham]

#1 Looks like a variation on a Green Stinkbug Nymph, 2.5-3mm long, anyone got a better ID?
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/GalleryPics/Photos/Insects/Insects%20Green%20and%20Black%20Bug%20004.jpg

#2 another fly
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/GalleryPics/Photos/Insects/Insects%20Fly%20A%20008.jpg

#3 spider
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/GalleryPics/Photos/Insects/Insects%20Spider%20B%20002%20copy.jpg

[Omri Alon]

Great pics :D As you know, the problem with natural light is the DOF. It is really to bad about that.
I really like the fly :)

[Lester Wareham]

Thnaks Omri.

Yes they are all at ~1/200 f8 ISO 800, I did not want to push the ISO higher than that and I needed a resonable shutter speed to stop the subjects small movements despite using a monopod to stop shake.

[LordV]

Think the fly works well :)
Brian V.

[Lester Wareham]

Thanks Brian.

Can you help with the ID on #1?

I have one reference each for a Nymph or either Green Shieldbug and Pied Shieldbug, any ideas?

[Fittipaldi]

PXL8 might be able to help...

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=185733

[Airedale1]

Very nice series, the fly is amazing.

[bandit 1]

Hiya Lester,
Nice series of shots, the fly does it for me, I see you found one of my babies, I found some eggs of "Pied Shield Bugs" a fortnight ago, I kept them till they hatched, see link, http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=185787
Cheers for now
Mark

[Lester Wareham]

Hiya Lester,
Nice series of shots, the fly does it for me, I see you found one of my babies, I found some eggs of "Pied Shield Bugs" a fortnight ago, I kept them till they hatched, see link, http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=185787
Cheers for now
Mark

Hi Mark

Thanks for the confirmation, I had two references one saying Green Shield Bug and the other Pied, in the end I opted to set the fileinfo to "Pied Shieldbug, Sehirus bicolor, Nymph".

Good to know I picked right. Must have missed you origional post, congrats dad.


Lester

[spk1965]

Great pics :D As you know, the problem with natural light is the DOF. It is really to bad about that.
I really like the fly :)

Omri - how does natural light affect DOF? Are you saying that greater DOF is achieved when using flash? I'm new to the forum and photography, and I am trying to learn as much as I can about macro work. Just received my 100mm/f2.8 yesterday and look forward to taking some first photos this weekend. :)

[Lester Wareham]

Omri - how does natural light affect DOF? Are you saying that greater DOF is achieved when using flash? I'm new to the forum and photography, and I am trying to learn as much as I can about macro work. Just received my 100mm/f2.8 yesterday and look forward to taking some first photos this weekend. :)

All he means is that for good DOF in macro (which is very limited) you want to stop down as far as you can without loosing to much sharpness through diffraction.

At the same time you need fast shutter speeds to freeze movement that is more obvious because of the magnification.

Coupled with these two technical drivers is the light loss experienced with closeup and macro work (1.5 to 2 stops at life size depending on the lens focus method) this makes the problem of exposure more significant.

So flash makes life a lot easier, there is plenty of light to stop down by and the very short duration freeses movement. Because there is plenty of light low ISO speeds can also be used for maximum image quality.

Conversly everything works against you with natural light exposure wise, so there tends to be more of a compromise in terms of ISO speed, DOF and shutter speed that makes it much harder to get sharp shots.

[spk1965]

All he means is that for good DOF in macro (which is very limited) you want to stop down as far as you can without loosing to much sharpness through diffraction.

At the same time you need fast shutter speeds to freeze movement that is more obvious because of the magnification.

Coupled with these two technical drivers is the light loss experienced with closeup and macro work (1.5 to 2 stops at life size depending on the lens focus method) this makes the problem of exposure more significant.

So flash makes life a lot easier, there is plenty of light to stop down by and the very short duration freeses movement. Because there is plenty of light low ISO speeds can also be used for maximum image quality.

Conversly everything works against you with natural light exposure wise, so there tends to be more of a compromise in terms of ISO speed, DOF and shutter speed that makes it much harder to get sharp shots.

Thanks Lester :) Makes alot of sense. So with the Canon 100mm/f2.8 how far can I stop down? I'm I best off in Manual, Av, or Tv mode? I assume that I don't worry too much about achieving correct EV values as the flash fill will take care of foreground and background. Is this right or totally ignorant?

Thanks.

[Lester Wareham]

Thanks Lester :) Makes alot of sense. So with the Canon 100mm/f2.8 how far can I stop down? I'm I best off in Manual, Av, or Tv mode? I assume that I don't worry too much about achieving correct EV values as the flash fill will take care of foreground and background. Is this right or totally ignorant?

Thanks.

If using flash with the 100mm I tend to use manual 100 ISO, set the shutter sync speed and use f16. Sharper results but with less DOF might be obtained using f11. As a variation you can get some background exposure by increasing the ambient light exposure, perhaps ISO 200, 1/200, f11. With the MP-E I tend to use f8-f16 depending on the magnification.

Using ambient light with the 100mm possibly ISO 400 or 800, down as far as 1/160 but possibly 1/250 if possible and f8 or f11 depending on subject and light. I also use a monopod if at all possible.

In fact I use a monopod even with flash, paricularly with the MP-E at higher magnifications, as this not only steadies the focus but helps take the weight of the kit of my old bones. :D

[spk1965]

If using flash with the 100mm I tend to use manual 100 ISO, set the shutter sync speed and use f16. Sharper results but with less DOF might be obtained using f11. As a variation you can get some background exposure by increasing the ambient light exposure, perhaps ISO 200, 1/200, f11. With the MP-E I tend to use f8-f16 depending on the magnification.

Using ambient light with the 100mm possibly ISO 400 or 800, down as far as 1/160 but possibly 1/250 if possible and f8 or f11 depending on subject and light. I also use a monopod if at all possible.

In fact I use a monopod even with flash, paricularly with the MP-E at higher magnifications, as this not only steadies the focus but helps take the weight of the kit of my old bones. :D

Thanks for the help Lester. I'll give it a try and see how it come out. :)

[Leorooster]

Sometimes, I just wish I could step down to f/32 without losing any sharpness ;) Unfortunately, that's impossible ;) Anyway, nice shots, especially the fly shot ;)

[Lester Wareham]

Thanks Leo.

The fly was seriously backlit, so there was some use of curves on the raw conversion to help the dynamic range.

[Ianfp]

Great photos!

[red_fan]

Think #2 is the delightfully named 'flesh fly'

[Lester Wareham]

Thanks Ianfp and red_fan.

[Lester Wareham]

Think #2 is the delightfully named 'flesh fly'

Thanks red_fan, updating the file info as I right. Quite an atractive fly.

I wonder if this is the species that medical doctors are starting to use to clean wounds. They bind the wound up with loads of magots (specially grown) and the magots just eat the dead flesh and leave the good stuff.

Aparantly they got the idea from some chap who rolled his Volvo Estate down an bank and was not found few a few days. None of his wounds were infected because magots had cleaned them.