Post your insects

[Andrew76]

One of my first shots with a new macro lens. Let me know what you think!

[Dave Humphries]

One of my first shots with a new macro lens.


Let me know what you think!

Hi Andrew,

Well I think it is not bad for a first go, and better than mine were, at least yours has a sharp bit of flutterby.

EXIF data; 1/500s, f/2.8 iso100 with a 100mm lens on a Canon Rebel XSi (people may ask, so I thought I'd provide it)

You have good composition and exposure, the main problem is a lack of DoF (depth of field) due to the use of f/2.8, I would have used f/11, f/16 or even f/22 for a shot at this angle, but that would mean raising the iso and probably lowering the shutter speed to maintain the exposure.

Cheers,

[Andrew76]

Hey Dave, thanks for your time and advice. I'm off to the garden now to try some more. I do have one question though..... I thought that for macro photography, you 'wanted' to have a complete lack of DoF?? That's why I tried 2.8. Now of course I understand that everyone has different opinions, but am I missing something??

Thanks again, this has been a great learning experience!

[Andrew76]

But that's why the right wing is out of focus isn't it??? See - I'm learning!

[Letrow]

Wendy

This one has lovely colours Wendy. It is a pity you have that fence in the background I think, because his posture is fantastic.

[Letrow]

One of my first shots with a new macro lens. Let me know what you think!

I have the same comment as Dave Andrew, you need more DOF. The composition is quite nice, its head could have been a bit sharper for my taste, you seem to have more focus on the wing.
You don't need 1/500 sec, for most insects 1/250 should be fine (and even less for some others, depending on the insect). I am not sure what your camera is capable of, but I would try a higher ISO, 100 is very low. F/11 or higher is recommended for macro.

[Geoff F]

Andrew, one of the important points of macro photography is getting a perfect angle, even when using a narrow aperture like F16. Getting the head in sharp focus usually works, even if the tail, wing tips, or legs, etc are a bit soft.

But the really trick part is achieving that angle without scaring your subject. That is why there are so many rejects of macro shots.

[Dave Humphries]

~ I do have one question though..... I thought that for macro photography, you 'wanted' to have a complete lack of DoF?? That's why I tried 2.8. Now of course I understand that everyone has different opinions, but am I missing something??

Not sure if you are missing something, but macro is all about photographing tiny objects, not minimal DoF.

Unfortunately, minimal DoF is usually what you get, but not usually because that was the aim.
Sometimes it works with a minimal DoF


Nikon D5000 + Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR2: 1/250s, f/4.5, iso1600 (28607)

while other times, it is better to see more sharper;


Nikon D5000 + Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR2: 1/45s, f/11, iso1600 (28614)

Beyond this, there are techniques like focus stacking which can help obtain front to back sharpness, but it means taking multiple exposures, so only really possible when the camera is tripod mounted and the subject can't move.

Cheers,

[Andrew76]

Excellent! Thanks everyone! I'll keep trying...

[Letrow]

Bumblebee (bombus hortorum)

[Dave Humphries]

Bumblebee (bombus hortorum)

Very nice Peter

[Letrow]

The bug... (common red soldier beetle or Rhagonycha fulva)



...and its mating ritual

[MiniChris]

Found this poor fellow atop my Mini last Tuesday afternoon. I know he had to have just landed as the car's wax job was far too slippery to allow him a hitch hiker's dream. It was shot with the 18-105 kit lens, so not the sharpest macro-like image, but still decent, I think.

[stevewe88]

Found this poor fellow atop my Mini last Tuesday afternoon. I know he had to have just landed as the car's wax job was far too slippery to allow him a hitch hiker's dream. It was shot with the 18-105 kit lens, so not the sharpest macro-like image, but still decent, I think.

Nice shot Chris. Is it me or is he missing a back leg

[stevewe88]

Whilst out on a family walk last weekend, my wife came across a lovely piece of driftwood on the shore of a lake. She had some kind of creative plan for it at home so she carried it around with her.

We stopped for a drink and I said it would be a good idea to tap the wood on the ground a few times to get all the creepy crawlies out. This she did and the fellow below fell out.

By normal UK standards, this think was huge, about two inches long and stood about an inch tall.

I had to carry the wood the rest of the way home



Cheers
Steve

[MiniChris]

Nice shot Chris. Is it me or is he missing a back leg

Hence the name...grasshopperless

[stevewe88]

Hence the name...grasshopperless

Doh

[ktuli]

Nice shot Chris. Is it me or is he missing a back leg

Hence the name...grasshopperless

He's not missing a leg guys... that species (Hesperotettix nascarii) doesn't have a hind left leg... That's also why you found him on your vehicle, Chris.

- Bill

[MiniChris]

Never heard of such a grasshopper...but I will leave that up to the experts...strange creatures, eh?

[Bobobird]

Some taken at a public garden.

Sorry no story. Just that I had wanted to photograph butterflies for quite a while and happened to be at the gardens the other day.

All taken with a 550D and 70-300L.

Monarch


Cabbage White


Silver-spotted Skipper (I think)


ID would be appreciated.


And a Dragon