Disappointed with my macro shooting: What am I doing wrong?

I look through the macro threads and I'm amazed at the quality of the shots that you guys post. I know I don't have the best equipment (due to $$$), but I think my shots should look better than they do. The pictures I see you guys post look so 'soft' and smooth, usually with great detail, especially on the eyes with all the 'dots' and such. My pictures have a 'rough' look to them, not soft, and I have a hard time getting the eye detail that I look for.

Here is my 'routine':
First off, I'm shooting with a T3i, Canon 100mm USM macro lens, 2X Teleconverter, and a 430exII flash.

I never use a tripod because I just walk around, usually at a park, looking for something to shoot, and it would be tough getting a tripod close enough to shoot in bushes and such.

It seems like it's been windy a lot lately, but I've had this trouble in still conditions as well.

Here is an example of what I'm talking about. I have no detail on the eye. Am I missing focus, is there movement, is my flash too harsh, are my settings bad, etc...?

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

I am also new to macro, and I am having similar issues.
I really like the images that macro captures, so I am interested in what others have to say, I am going to spend the time to make this part of my photography work.

Ace, I've admired some of your other macro shots that didn't suffer from these problems...Maybe you just missed focus on these two shots...Also what are you using to diffuse your flash?...Undiffused flash can cause a certain harshness to the images produced.

Think the major problem with these shots is diffraction softening - shooting at F32 or F36 at 1:1 to 2:1 magnification will give you a lot of image sharpness loss.
Using a 2X TC also will not help much.
Try just shooting at 1:1 with flash at F11- yes you will sacrifice some DOF but the shots will be a lot sharper.
Using wider apertures will also give you much faster flash durations making motion blur less likely.
Brian v.

Ace, I admire most of the work you post, I think it is great. In some ways I think we may be too critical of our own work, even when we get it right.

One of the things I gained from being so bad for so long was finding that motion blur is often simple enough to see. On the original shot zoom to full size, any motion blur becomes obvious on small points of interest, like a pollen grain. It does not always show up with the complexity of compound eyes, they simply look soft.

I have looked at the original size shot on Flickr, and that seems to be OK as far as motion is concerned. It is soft, so the most likely reason I can think of (as Brian stated) is the Aperture is too small.

If it helps, my recent shots seem to be better, and the main things I have changed are;

Sticking with wider apertures (around F/10-F/11) for shots up to 2x. By sticking with settings I know can work well I could address my failings.
Getting the light softened. Trying lots of things to make the scene look as natural as possible.
Getting the exposure right. FEC used to get that right per subject.
Getting the focus point right. That is my hardest one. I am not stable and I only shoot handheld, but I do miss focus a LOT. Of two hundred and fifty shots yesterday there were maybe 50 that were OK, thirty seemed worth keeping and six worth posting.
I suppose the final one is framing and composition. I learned a lot from the macro forum, and in general I am happier with the shots I get (with respect to composition at least).

As far as I can see, you already have focus and composition down to a T, so try working for a while at wider apertures, and I am sure you will clear the last hurdles.

Gentlemen, thank you sooooo much!! I think the 2x TC is the main problem. I was jacking the aperture into the 30's to try to add enough DoF that I lost by adding the 2x. I used to shoot at 1/200 * f/11~13 * ISO 200, but that all changed when I started using the 2x because I wasn't able to focus good enough shooting handheld with such a small Dof. I didn't know that the aperture degraded IQ so much, that's why I didn't look at that as possibly being the problem.

It's supposed to be a nice, cool, sunny day today, so I'm gonna remove the 2x and hit the park today and see what happens.

Thanks guys! My confidence was in the tank lately, we'll see how I do today!

~Ace

I agree with LordV in that it appears to be diffraction softening. Opening up the aperture is one way to deal with that. You can also make up for some of it in post by using an unsharp mask and increasing the radius to 2-5 pixels.

Well, I went out today to hunt some bugs and such. It was windy as Hell, but I definitely see some improvements in my shooting. Before I took off the 2x, I fired off about 20 shots with it...of course, 19 were non-usable, but here's the one I do like (shot with 2x @ f/13):

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Great shots Ace.

Now I wonder how to get shots like you ....

Much better second set of shots! I especially like 3 & 4, but more for subject matter than anything else.

Glad you dumped the 2XTC. I've heard bad things about the degradation of image quality, and opted for the 1.4X instead.

But when I want more magnification out of my 100 f/2.8, I attach extension tubes. Love 'em, but they require more light. I will occasionally use extension tubes and the 1.4X but it gets tricky.

Again, great improvement!

Bas - LOL, thanks, but I'm still light years behind you!

Moose - Thanks...I actually have tubes on the way, should be here Tuesday or Wednesday.

These new ones look really good!...But you've had other good ones in the past too...You will enjoy those tubes when you get them.

rrblint wrote in post #15033300
These new ones look really good!...But you've had other good ones in the past too...You will enjoy those tubes when you get them.

Thanks! That's why I was asking for help, I felt that my shooting was getting worse. I was under the assumption the 2x would help with my macro, which it can, but boy is it tough with such a narrow DoF. My main problem was compensating for the shallow DoF with throwing the aperture into the 30's, which gave me great DoF, but trashed my images. I still have so much to learn, and thanks to the great people here, they knew the problem right away.

It was such a good feeling to see some decent shots (for my standards) today...like a breathe of fresh air!!

A complete set of extension tubes (68mm) will take your 100mm up to 2x mag. And they have little detrimental effect on image quality and sharpness. I am convinced that even at 1:1 the 100mm Macro just isn't as sharp as the MP-E. But the 100mm and ext tubes served me very well indeed.

100mm and 68mm extension tubes:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/30704753@N02/6​981647501/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/30704753@N02/7​807049820/

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'