macro question
- Thread starter lucien
- Start date
This below from Fuji website which indicates the macro and super macro modes do in fact focus closer to the subject which is what macro really means>>>> Close Focus.
It has a 1/2" sensor which I take to mean diagonally, so if you can use that to determine if you are getting 1:1 or closer. Take a shot of a ruler laid diagonal across the frame and see how close you can focus.
FinePix HS25EXR / HS28EXR
Focus distance
(from lens surface) Normal
It has a 1/2" sensor which I take to mean diagonally, so if you can use that to determine if you are getting 1:1 or closer. Take a shot of a ruler laid diagonal across the frame and see how close you can focus.
FinePix HS25EXR / HS28EXR
Focus distance
(from lens surface) Normal
- Wide: Approx. 45cm to infinity / 1.4ft. to infinity
- Telephoto: Approx. 3.0m to infinity / 9.8ft. to infinity
- Wide: Approx. 7cm–3.0m / 2.7in.–9.8ft.
- Telephoto: Approx. 2.0m–5.0m / 6.5ft.–16.4ft.
- Approx. 1cm–1.0m / 0.4in.–3.2ft.
It will have to be zoomed out to wide angle to be able to focus very close.
A ruler works to check how close to 1:1, either horizontal or vertical, however you also have to know the sensor size. Sometimes that is known, sometimes it is not.
Specs at FinePix HS25EXR / HS28EXR | Specifications | Fujifilm Global
says it is a 1/2 inch sensor. That is an extremely vague way to not say anything specific.
Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes
says a Fuji HS30 1/2" sensor is 6.4 x 4.8 mm ... which possibly could be close?
If it were 6.4mm wide, then the crop factor (compared to 35mm film) would be 5.6.
Probably reasonable, because...
Fuji lens specs say 4.2 to 126 mm, Equivalent to 35mm film 24-720 mm.
That computes crop factor to be 24/4.2 = 5.71, which is fairly close to the 5.6 crop number computed from approximate sensor size.
Last edited:
yeah I'll keep the lens at the default 24mm equiv. and get as close as possible with the super macro setting on. And hopefully things will work out. When I do it and it does come out, what will it mean? It's a macro? I'm new to this. It will give me a 1:1 ratio, which is what I should be looking for? Do you think it's digitally enhanced "fake" macro?
Last edited:
I am skeptical it will give 1:1, but sure, it can be very close and big, big enough to pass for macro. Anything bigger than about 1:10 can pass for macro.
Real macro lenses can do 1:1, but most uses will be a bit farther. Not many "macro" pictures are actually 1:1 in practice. A flower in closeup is 2 or 3 inches wide, but the little compact sensor is only about 1/4 inch wide, so 1:1 would not be practical in a general case.
For example, a little regular compact camera (with such a macro setting) can copy 35mm slides to be full frame. A slide copy at full frame is a very big enlargement (requiring 1:1 on a full frame camera), but compared to the tiny compact sensor, it would do good to be 1:5. No one is going to argue it is not macro.
Real macro lenses can do 1:1, but most uses will be a bit farther. Not many "macro" pictures are actually 1:1 in practice. A flower in closeup is 2 or 3 inches wide, but the little compact sensor is only about 1/4 inch wide, so 1:1 would not be practical in a general case.
For example, a little regular compact camera (with such a macro setting) can copy 35mm slides to be full frame. A slide copy at full frame is a very big enlargement (requiring 1:1 on a full frame camera), but compared to the tiny compact sensor, it would do good to be 1:5. No one is going to argue it is not macro.
Last edited:
I took my wifes Fuji HS30 out today to test it for you but it was too windy for macro so i just did a few flowers to keep the camera working
Hi Mike where is that pic you took today with the HS30? Do you have a link? Sorry to go off topic
Last edited:
If you are measuring enlargement ratio (like 1:1), it doesn't matter if you use width, height, or diagonal... so long as you compare the same dimension on subject and image. It's just about size of image on the sensor. If a 6mm object is a 6mm image on the sensor, then that is real life size of 1:1. That would be 1:1 regardless of the size of the sensor, but unfortunately, with digital, knowing sensor size is our only measuring tool. With film, we could simply measure it on the negative on the table.
If you are computing crop factor, diagonal perhaps has an edge if the sensor size is not 3:2 to match 35mm film. Can't really precisely compare different shapes of course, but diagonal is a good compromise. This can surely be argued either way.
But if sensor is 3:2 (a DSLR), matching 35 mm film, then any dimension works same as any other.
If you are computing crop factor, diagonal perhaps has an edge if the sensor size is not 3:2 to match 35mm film. Can't really precisely compare different shapes of course, but diagonal is a good compromise. This can surely be argued either way.
But if sensor is 3:2 (a DSLR), matching 35 mm film, then any dimension works same as any other.
Last edited:
please sort me out. I get a ruler. keep the cam at 24mm hit super macro then take a pic of the ruler as close as possible. And you guys can tell if it's accurate? This is a very advanced field and I'm going to submit what I took following the instructions. Just to get this right the ruler can be horizontal/ vertical etc. as long as the #'s can be seen. Are certain rulers better, would a tape measure work? or a tailor's tape? I'm not going to crop. I want to submit the data as is. In the future I may Play. I don't want to put fuji on the spot either. I'm going to do every which way but lose, for the sample. vertical horizontal and diagonal. Would prefer if the dust settles and I can't be the judge. what kind of data would you need from me? measuring tape data ie mm cm inches? and....
Your words seem to be seeking requirements for some specific goal (of submission somewhere) that we don't know anything about. Mystery to us too.
If all you want to do is to determine the enlargement factor (like 1:1 or 1:4, etc), then that part is not hard. Just photograph the ruler as close and large as you can manage it (in focus).
Then if you see say 6mm of ruler, and if the image of the ruler is 6mm, then that is real life size of 1:1.
If you see 24 mm of ruler, with an image size of 6mm then that is 6:24 or 1:4 ratio.
However, to know the size of the image, you will have to know the size of the sensor.
Best evidence is that the Fuji sensor is 6.4 x 4.8 mm dimensions. You have to use that to judge your image size.
Maybe like seeing 35mm of ruler across the 6.4mm sensor width, which would be 1:5.5 ratio.
If all you want to do is to determine the enlargement factor (like 1:1 or 1:4, etc), then that part is not hard. Just photograph the ruler as close and large as you can manage it (in focus).
Then if you see say 6mm of ruler, and if the image of the ruler is 6mm, then that is real life size of 1:1.
If you see 24 mm of ruler, with an image size of 6mm then that is 6:24 or 1:4 ratio.
However, to know the size of the image, you will have to know the size of the sensor.
Best evidence is that the Fuji sensor is 6.4 x 4.8 mm dimensions. You have to use that to judge your image size.
Maybe like seeing 35mm of ruler across the 6.4mm sensor width, which would be 1:5.5 ratio.
I posted 3 from this point on
http://nikonites.com/general-photography/621-post-your-flower-pics-470.html#axzz3XorhzZ1A
mike, I saw it and for sure the camera can get closer than that. I mean for "macros" the proof is in someone's pudding. I shall post at the earliest convenience then it's subjective or objective. The reason I ask is, the data won't be in the exif just an interpretation of image shown. And it that is all it boils down to "it's a true macro" notice the quotes
that is the sweet spot I was looking for. The ruler can be straight, sideways or every which way but loose. As long as I take a pic of 1 cm and that's what shows up on the image. It is a 1-1 I think I have the concept. Thanks a lot. I only need to submit one pic then and measurements from any ruler correct orientation of the ruler is of no significance. I thought I had to measure the sensor or something silly like that
Ruler ought to be straight horizontally or vertically, so that you know the sensor size dimension that way.
Then yes, just see how much ruler you can show that way.
The only hard part is knowing the size of the sensor. The Fuji sensor is probably 6.4x4.8mm, at least the best that we know (from the Wikipedia chart).
but with the math done, it's not a "true macro" then even at super macro. the ratio is .05 off am I correct is that because of the sensor size? Am I getting close. Can't everything be calculated then without asking these questions?
btw my math is for shit