Flowers and other Flora
- Thread starter dpc
- Start date
All the few hours of my walk today I was calling the wind some names (you don't need to hear that
!).
The wind was 29 and up to 39mph in the gusts but my impression was the gusts were ~80% of the time!
But it was exactly the wind to create the situation for the very last photo - I needed only to push the dial to -2/3 EV! Accented little bit in PP to put the stress on the drama...
!).The wind was 29 and up to 39mph in the gusts but my impression was the gusts were ~80% of the time
!But it was exactly the wind to create the situation for the very last photo - I needed only to push the dial to -2/3 EV! Accented little bit in PP to put the stress on the drama...
Upvote
0
I always wonderAll the few hours of my walk today I was calling the wind some names (you don't need to hear that
The wind was 29 and up to 39mph in the gusts but my impression was the gusts were ~80% of the time
But it was exactly the wind to create the situation for the very last photo - I needed only to push the dial to -2/3 EV! Accented little bit in PP to put the stress on the drama...
View attachment 202971View attachment 202972View attachment 202973View attachment 202974View attachment 202975View attachment 202976
how you manage to obtain such a huge d.o.f. despite moving insects?Any explanation?
Upvote
0
The "moving insect" have nothing to do with the DOF: I was going to take a photo of the flower on image #2 when I noticed the fly going consistently around. Closed the aperture to F10 (at distance, according to Opanda IExif 2.99 cm as I found at home). Didn't have more room to go back because of the brush behind me - as I already found time ago at this distance my camera/lens are reporting "focus on" but photos are not as sharp as I would expect... At this distance and the setting I mentioned above with 500mm prime you should have total DOF 1.2 cm. The flower by itself is somewhere between 2.5-3.0 cm.I always wonder
Any explanation?
With the last two images: That flower (medium sized tree - Hutu, Barringtonia asiatica) has a diameter of ~12-15cm I guess, and I closed the aperture to f11. At distance 708 cm you should have DOF of total 8.43cm.
These two images (of the same flower!) are very different at the conditions of shooting: the first one is at the "normal" (ha, ha...) condition with a speed 1/150" (zero correction). The second one because of the wind and the movement of the canopy above the flower got some light, so I moved to -0.67EV correction (speed 1/3200") and started shooting. ISO 1600. Frame of the event less than 1sec (I got 5 shots with this light at rate 10 per sec.)
The last 3 sentences have nothing to do with the DOF! Edit: I just wanted to show how fast and SMART
I'm - SORRY!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
By "moving insect vs. dof I meant:The "moving insect" have nothing to do with the DOF: I was going to take a photo of the flower on image #2 when I noticed the fly going consistently around. Closed the aperture to F10 (at distance, according to Opanda IExif 2.99 cm as I found at home). Didn't have more room to go back because of the brush behind me - as I already found time ago at this distance my camera/lens are reporting "focus on" but photos are not as sharp as I would expect... At this distance and the setting I mentioned above with 500mm prime you should have total DOF 1.2 cm. The flower by itself is somewhere between 2.5-3.0 cm.
With the last two images: That flower (medium sized tree - Hutu, Barringtonia asiatica) has a diameter of ~12-15cm I guess, and I closed the aperture to f11. At distance 708 cm you should have DOF of total 8.43cm.
These two images (of the same flower!) are very different at the conditions of shooting: the first one is at the "normal" (ha, ha...) condition with a speed 1/150" (zero correction). The second one because of the wind and the movement of the canopy above the flower got some light, so I moved to -0.67EV correction (speed 1/3200") and started shooting. ISO 1600. Frame of the event less than 1sec (I got 5 shots with this light at rate 10 per sec.)
The last 3 sentences have nothing to do with the DOF! Edit: I just wanted to show how fast and SMART
- flowers need closed diaphragm for dof
- moving insect needs high shutter speed
- high shutter speed and good dof "contradict" each other
- and macros hate high ISO...
- proof you're smart, no need to be sorry!
Upvote
0
Whatever... I'm shooting with 500mm prime and it hardly can go for "macro". There are formulas to calculate the DOF by the magnification (and you will get the same results) and my 500mm don't have the magnification of real macro lens (off courseBy "moving insect vs. dof I meant:
- flowers need closed diaphragm for dof
- moving insect needs high shutter speed
- high shutter speed and good dof "contradict" each other
- and macros hate high ISO...
- proof you're smart, no need to be sorry!
)!. The Canon shooters have now the 100-500mm zoom that is working better for these situations!I wish my 500mm was doing 1:1 magnification - than I can shoot the moon without a ladder!
P.S. The last sentence is to illustrate how smart I'm
!
Upvote
0
Now seriously: the fly I think is kind of hover fly - you don't need very high speeds to get them if you wait in "ambush". In this case the speed was 1/800" - enough to get the body +/- "frozen". The wings are different story. Many people are shooting Dragonflies by the same method.Whatever... I'm shooting with 500mm prime and it hardly can go for "macro". There are formulas to calculate the DOF by the magnification (and you will get the same results) and my 500mm don't have the magnification of real macro lens (off course
I wish my 500mm was doing 1:1 magnification - than I can shoot the moon without a ladder!
P.S. The last sentence is to illustrate how smart I'm
Upvote
0
