Post your macro photos here

[J-see]

 

[wev]

Up too damn early, but found a handsome moth lounging on the screen

 

[wev]

And in profile

 

[J-see]

 

[NikDon]

 

[J-see]

 

[J-see]

 

[Brazeal]

[/URL]MLB_4496 by Forney Photography, on Flickr[/IMG]

 

[Brazeal]

More from today.

[/URL]MLB_4596-Edit-3 by Forney Photography, on Flickr[/IMG]

[/URL]MLB_4583-Edit-4 by Forney Photography, on Flickr[/IMG]

[/URL]MLB_4579-3 by Forney Photography, on Flickr[/IMG]

[/URL]MLB_4578-4 by Forney Photography, on Flickr[/IMG]

[/URL]MLB_4566-3 by Forney Photography, on Flickr[/IMG]

 

[ShallowShannon]

A couple from today

 

[J-see]

The one problem after another to solve. My diopters arrived today. I can go to +4 on the macro, +6 only when I focus beyond infinity.
The magnification is there but now I need to be able to close down massively to get more sharpness and depth. And get rid of stray light.

This is a full shot of a Daddy Longlegs. Minus the legs. Quality still needs work. A lot of it.

 

[J-see]

 

[J-see]

The macro and a +4 diopter. Hard but rewarding when it all comes together.

 

[bechdan]

Bee (unedited) D5100 and Tamron 90mm f2.8

 

[J-see]

I decided to take out the flash and go over the top. All diopters at once on the macro; +10D.

The first is some cord about 1mm. The second is toilet paper.





DOF no longer exists.

 

[J-see]

Experimenting a bit to see if landscape photography and macro are really two different things.

 

[Vincent]

Experimenting a bit to see if landscape photography and macro are really two different things.

They are, but you can do landscape photography with the 200 f4. Nice picture btw

I've been testing my ISO range and the D3300 performs well enough up to 800. At least for what I do. Sure I see some noise appear at 100% but the way I process, it is of little importance. Higher than 800 not so much.
These days I hardly ever shoot at 100. In macro too often all from the waist down is in shades which requires some upping the ISO but I even use it in full sun. There's too little difference between the shots to not benefit of the DOF increase.

If I'd be a professional, the D3300 would probably lack here and there but for a hobbyist, it's the right stuff.

I was with an other photographer this weekend, he was with his D810 which he has since 9 days. The main difference is the dynamic range and the processor, for him.
That means that you can have a lot bigger difference in light and colours in your picture that still come out very reasonable in the result. The quality compared to an APS-C is an other league, however do you need it for what you do? We did discuss that people exaggerate, I was in the rain with my D70s (2005, 6Mpix) and it delivered what I needed.

 

[J-see]

Sure landscape photography and macro are different for several reasons but on the other hand, landscape as we tend to see it is pretty much defined by our reality. In macro there are landscapes too but in this microverse different rules apply and what is a landscape there is set within those rules. It's there but we lack the equipment to shoot it as we do normal landscapes.

I noticed a lonely plastic flower pot outside my window. Some ex must have tried greening my place up. It's been there for years. When looking inside the pot, moss was growing in it and those things sticking out. Just before I read the reply about landscape vs macro and when looking at the moss, wondered what would happen if I'd take it inside, get my flash and shoot some angles.

It's surprisingly rewarding.



And one more:

 

[J-see]

Since it amused me:

 

[J-see]

Toying a bit with cropping and then blowing up in PS.