Dragonflies

Some shots I took yesterday of what I beleive is a southern hawker male dragonfly, although I might not be right on that.

Let me know what you think of the shots, taken with my 85mm f1.8 and kenko tubes on my 40D.

amazing photos. so sharp!

The depth of focus in the first shot is adequate, but not in the second shot.

I agree with Robert, but the first one would have been better with more DOF so that the wings would have been more in focus.

In the second one, the DOF is much too shallow and also it looks like the focus is off somewhat because the 100% crop of the eye doesn't look as sharp as it could be for a macro lens.

If you are new to macro, you will find that one of the curses of macro is terribly shallow DOF at aperture values that would be completely adequate in the case of normal photography where the focus distances are much greater. This means that you are stuck with using small apertures and the choice between really long exposures while hoping that the subject stays still or using lighting bright enough to almost set fire to the subject.

A friend who is a serious macro photographer uses a freezer to chill the subjects and then places them into a mock-up of the subject's natural setting in his studio to quickly take the shot. It beats trying to set up and use equipment in the dark outdoors. Of course this only works with some insects.

bill boehme wrote in post #6217354
I agree with Robert, but the first one would have been better with more DOF so that the wings would have been more in focus.

In the second one, the DOF is much too shallow and also it looks like the focus is off somewhat because the 100% crop of the eye doesn't look as sharp as it could be for a macro lens.

If you are new to macro, you will find that one of the curses of macro is terribly shallow DOF at aperture values that would be completely adequate in the case of normal photography where the focus distances are much greater. This means that you are stuck with using small apertures and the choice between really long exposures while hoping that the subject stays still or using lighting bright enough to almost set fire to the subject.

A friend who is a serious macro photographer uses a freezer to chill the subjects and then places them into a mock-up of the subject's natural setting in his studio to quickly take the shot. It beats trying to set up and use equipment in the dark outdoors. Of course this only works with some insects.

Sure, I have been doing some macro photography for a few months, and I realise how tiny the DOF gets. Unfortunately I don't own (or can afford) a flash for my macro lens, and I didn't have a tripod with me either, so I was left to keeping the aperture reletively wide (I probably could have upped the iso a bit) so as not to get loads of camera shaken shots with an insufficiently fast shutter speed.

I appreciate what you've said so thanks for that, maybe next time I'll take my tripod and do some with MLU at f13 or so. :P

Somehow and sadly my siggy 50mm f2.8 macro is missing, which I bought a couple of years back on a 300D, so I've recently been limited to my 85mm f1.8 and kenko tubes, which don't seem to work aswell as a dedicated macro. :/

Fantastic images.

ipschoser1 wrote in post #6221398
Fantastic images.

Thanks.

Great shot, How did you get so close, I have problems doing that with my 400mm,,,,,Very nice

Excellent shots.

I support your DOF Choice in #2. It is obvious that the insect's head was intended to be the main point of interrest by way of its position in the frame and its selected focusing.