Nymph

[Jim B.]

A Fork Tailed Katydid Nymph.


It's been cruising my flowers for about a week.I found it on an Asian Lily this morning.

5DII Sigma 150 f/14 ISO 100 1/125" MR-14ex ringflash.

[Sahil]

A great shot, Jim. Have you used, what is, perhaps, known as Multi Focus shot? Not sure about the term. Love the details and clarity..

[carregwen]

Excellent shot, Jim. Terrific clarity and detail. What lens did you use - the Sigma?

[Jim B.]

A great shot, Jim. Have you used, what is, perhaps, known as Multi Focus shot? Not sure about the term. Love the details and clarity..

Thanks,Sahil.This was a single shot.I didn't focus stack,but am going to try some stacks soon.

[Jim B.]

Excellent shot, Jim. Terrific clarity and detail. What lens did you use - the Sigma?

Thanks,Rob.
Yep,Sigma 150 macro.I picked up an adapter that allows me to mount the MR-14ex to the Sigma.I have a Canon 100 macro,but like the working distance I get with the extra 50mm on the 150 for insects.

[carregwen]

Thanks,Rob.
Yep,Sigma 150 macro.I picked up an adapter that allows me to mount the MR-14ex to the Sigma.I have a Canon 100 macro,but like the working distance I get with the extra 50mm on the 150 for insects.

Looks to be a nice lens. I have the Sigma 105 macro which is very good. Also the 70-200 Sigma, which acts as a macro as well as normal telephoto. I haven't really used it for macro as it weighs too much, three pounds!

Do you find you get better DOF because you are using 150mm and standing further back, which changes the spatial relationship? Does that make sense?

[Yan Zhang]

Jim,

This is a lovely shot. The focus and DOF seem to be perfect to me. I noted you used a flash. What will happen if you don't use a flash? I asked this because I don't have a flash.

Regards,

Yan

[Jim B.]

I like the Sigma, build quality and IQ are outstanding.
Is your 70-200 a f/2.8? It's as heavy as my Canon 100-400!

The Dof difference between the two,I've not considered that.I'll do some test shots and see if there is a difference.
I've been on macro threads where the pros talk about formulas to figure magnification,DoF etc,but my eyes gloss over and I get a buzzing in my head when I try to follow.

One more from a different angle.

[Jim B.]

Jim,

This is a lovely shot. The focus and DOF seem to be perfect to me. I noted you used a flash. What will happen if you don't use a flash? I asked this because I don't have a flash.

Regards,

Yan

Yan,
Thanks for the comments.I shoot natural light macro also.The flash makes things a bit easier.It freezes any movement the insect might make.I can shoot at a low ISO.Because I was shooting at f/14 to get good DoF, if I didn't use a flash the ISO would have been up around 400.
With flash I have more control over the lighting.
If you are going to shoot natural light,make sure there's plenty of it unless you shoot close to wide open aperture. The DoF gets very thin at large apertures.

[Stinky]

Great Shot. Nice detail. Fly tiers around the world would be envious

[Klickit]

Apart from the purely technical proficiency of sharpness and good depth of feel, what I love about this image are the totally delicious colours. That pink! That green! The linking browns! Wunderbar!

Edit: Depth of feel! What a nana. Depth of field!

[carregwen]

Is your 70-200 a f/2.8? It's as heavy as my Canon 100-400!

Yes, f/2.8, and it produces a nice bokeh. I think it's so heavy because it's 77mm diameter on the lens.

The Dof difference between the two,I've not considered that.I'll do some test shots and see if there is a difference.

Typically, if you stand with someone 10ft in front of you, and another person 10ft beheind him, and use f/4, the first person will be in focus, and the second will be OOF slightly. If you move closer to the first, the second will become more OOF. But I'm never sure how much difference that makes with close-ups/macros, because the relative differences are so small. Colin might know?

Second shot is excellent, perhaps even better. A very nice composition too.

[Colin Southern]

Yes, f/2.8, and it produces a nice bokeh. I think it's so heavy because it's 77mm diameter on the lens.



Typically, if you stand with someone 10ft in front of you, and another person 10ft beheind him, and use f/4, the first person will be in focus, and the second will be OOF slightly. If you move closer to the first, the second will become more OOF. But I'm never sure how much difference that makes with close-ups/macros, because the relative differences are so small. Colin might know?

I'm not sure I understand the question - but with Macro you usually have to shoot stopped down anyway (and DoF is usually a challenge).

[Dave Humphries]

Apart from the purely technical proficiency of sharpness and good depth of feel, what I love about this image are the totally delicious colours. That pink! That green! The linking browns! Wunderbar!

Edit: Depth of feel! What a nana. Depth of field!

Hi Kit,

I agree about the colours, that struck me too. UK bugs seem to be black, and usually found on dull green leaves

Two very nice shots Jim

btw Kit, I loved the 'depth of feel', so glad you left it in with the hilarious follow up comment - it made my afternoon (in a nice way)

Thanks,

[Dave Humphries]

Typically, if you stand with someone 10ft in front of you, and another person 10ft beheind him, and use f/4, the first person will be in focus, and the second will be OOF slightly. If you move closer to the first, the second will become more OOF. But I'm never sure how much difference that makes with close-ups/macros, because the relative differences are so small. Colin might know?

Hi Rob,

I agree with Colin, you're so strectched getting the nose and ears (let alone tail) of the first bug sharp and within DoF that anything behind is just gonna be a blur whatever aperture you use - well certainly when you approach 1/2 life size and greater.

I used your theory above when positioning a bird table though, to get the background nicely soft.

Cheers,

[carregwen]

I'm not sure I understand the question - but with Macro you usually have to shoot stopped down anyway (and DoF is usually a challenge).

I thinl the question was how much more depth of field do you get using a 150mm macro lens at say, 2ft, than you would using a 60mm at 1ft (or whatever the required distance was to fill the frame the same amount). For example, in shot #2 above the back leg is starting to go out of focus. If you used a 300mm macro (from further back) would you have at least decreased that OOF effect?

[Dave Humphries]

I thinl the question was how much more depth of field do you get using a 150mm macro lens at say, 2ft, than you would using a 60mm at 1ft (or whatever the required distance was to fill the frame the same amount). For example, in shot #2 above the back leg is starting to go out of focus. If you used a 300mm macro (from further back) would you have at least decreased that OOF effect?

Whoah, too difficult (also not what you said <wink>), isn't that what those DoF calculator thingys are for?

EDIT, they don't work to well close up and getting the distance appropriate for the same subject size is tricky too!
Investigating further ...