• UPDATE



    The forum will be moving to a new domain in the near future (canonrumorsforum.com). I have turned off "read-only", but I will only leave the two forum nodes you see active for the time being.

    I don't know at this time how quickly the change will happen, but that will move at a good pace I am sure.

    ------------------------------------------------------------

MP-E 65mm - High Difficulty Level

Sabaki said:
I've posted before about an Australian who does focus stacking on live peacock jumping spiders.

I asked him how he manages this and he says he uses a battery pack and 'walks' into the subject whilst firing off 10 shots in quick succession. I think this may actually be a very good practise and I'll pick up a battery pack in a few months.

10 shots is not that many for z-stacking at >>1:1. Jumping spiders are rather small (~ 5 mm body length, twice that with legs, so about 3:1 mag for covering entire image on FF body). At f/2.8 and 3:1 step-size at 70% of DOF is about 52 µm. Assuming that spider is about as deep as wide, then you will need 100–200 frames for a full stack. If you use the f-effective/32 rule, then you can set f/8, get step size of ~150 µm, and you "only" need 30 frames or so. To get close to 5 mm depth of field with 10 shots, you have to set f/22 = effective f/88, with step size of 411 µm.

It's kind of scary and awesome to play around with it.
 
Upvote 0
Zeidora said:
Sabaki said:
I've posted before about an Australian who does focus stacking on live peacock jumping spiders.

I asked him how he manages this and he says he uses a battery pack and 'walks' into the subject whilst firing off 10 shots in quick succession. I think this may actually be a very good practise and I'll pick up a battery pack in a few months.

10 shots is not that many for z-stacking at >>1:1. Jumping spiders are rather small (~ 5 mm body length, twice that with legs, so about 3:1 mag for covering entire image on FF body). At f/2.8 and 3:1 step-size at 70% of DOF is about 52 µm. Assuming that spider is about as deep as wide, then you will need 100–200 frames for a full stack. If you use the f-effective/32 rule, then you can set f/8, get step size of ~150 µm, and you "only" need 30 frames or so. To get close to 5 mm depth of field with 10 shots, you have to set f/22 = effective f/88, with step size of 411 µm.

It's kind of scary and awesome to play around with it.

Here's a shot of Michael's. I'm quite impressed and want to replicate the technique for similar results
 

Attachments

  • Michael Doe.jpg
    Michael Doe.jpg
    76.8 KB · Views: 197
Upvote 0
Sabaki said:
Here's a shot of Michael's. I'm quite impressed and want to replicate the technique for similar results
Michael Doe - just saw another pic of his of this cute little colorfull fella. His photos are amazing indeed.

This tech with the stack photos. I know it, but haven't tried it yet.
 
Upvote 0
The lens is not that hard to use. A decent workflow makes a huge difference. What is described here works well for 10X microscope objectives, too, which can be mounted on a filter ring using a regular lens as a tube lens.

First, definitely start by using a tripod as hand held is ridiculously hit-or-miss. Learn what working distance is relative to magnification (I posted a quick guide on photomacrography.net, search for my scottburgess handle there around June 2013). Center the lens and camera on a rail on the tripod. Decide the approach vector and framing of your subject. Match the framing to the appropriate sized colored rectangle on the quick guide, which tells you how to set the magnification on the lens. Place the tripod from the chosen approach vector as close to the given working distance from the subject as possible--the guide has working distance too. Then slide the lens a tiny bit along the rail to focus. After a little practice, this will become reasonably fast to step through. Because you've got the entire tripod almost correctly placed to begin with you won't have problems with heavy gear cantilevered away from the center of gravity which causes the whole mess to sink in some odd direction or vibrate uncontrollably when the shutter trips.

Second, depth of field is very limited due to diffraction. At higher magnifications like 4X and 5X, f/2.8 - f/4 is about all you have to work with, and the DOF is in fractions of a millimeter. So think in terms of flat plane slices when composing. Sometimes it is better to shoot at lower magnification and crop.

Diffraction can also be challenging if you work with small pixel bodies. Don't toss that old digital body because it has "too few" pixels!

You will need to use a flash for live critters (and I often use rear curtain sync). There are some challenges as real critters won't tolerate the flash much. Also, the Canon ring flash is not canted on the interior of the ring so it lacks some coverage at 5X.

Occasionally I use a small light tent to control wind when working in the field. I've done macro work in bright daylight and 20mph wind gusts, with the tent yielding soft light on subject and a black backdrop. Or green, or white! Glorious!

I know some people are mentioning focus stacking, but I recommend against investing in that until you're comfortable using the lens and are confident that further work with it will be a significant part of your portfolio. Focus stacking adds some complexity and cost to the proposition, and I find it easier to work with in a studio setup that I've built than in the field.

I love this lens. It definitely rewards those who work steadily and patiently with wondrous images of things not visible to the naked eye. My eyes are starting to get old enough that I am considering doing more of my work with it tethered to a laptop, but that's what the years do to you.

That's a quick summary of what you really need to know to work with this lens. I hope this helps, and good luck!

Should I add that refurbished units are on sale in the Canon shop, at $755? Oh, of course I should! :D The GAS made me do it!
 
Upvote 0