Mixed macro from a garden in Pembrokeshire

[ajohnw]

I hoped to try 2 camera set ups. An E-M5 with the Olympus 60mm macro lens and an E-620 with a Sigma 105mm macro lens. The 60mm proved difficult to use but I had more luck when I started to use the 1:1 switch on it. This presets the lens to the 1:1 focus position so if not in focus the camera can only focus further away which seems to help it get things correct. The E-620 is 4./3 and has an optical viewfinder so correct focus can be seen by eye. I still have a feeling that this is important for macro work and increases the success rates. Using the 60mm always pre setting 1:1 will have to wait until June.

Anyway here are some from the E-620, good or bad. No idea what most of them are. All hand held and no flash. Many were shot twice as I could see that the focus was out when the shot was actually taken.

1


2


3


4


5


6


8


9


10


11


12


13 Cute - couldn't get to the other side for a head view



14


15


All very quickly processed camera jpg's. Just sharpened, cropped and reduced-in most cases. Olympus generally do not leave much raw headroom especially on highlights.

The E-620 was Olympus's base 4/3 camera. Glass fibre reinforced body, single thumb wheel and all controls there and easy to get at. Leaves me wondering why they don't update it perhaps with a full spec IS this time. As things stand that's all the E-30 gains over it really. Noise levels are as would be expected in 2008/2009.

John
-

[deetheturk]

#1,#10 and #11 are drone fly's#12 is a hover fly#9 are shield bugs,as for the the rest we need Geoff or Jack for i.d. purposes,looks like you have given the gear a good workout John!

[ajohnw]

I suspect 6 is some sort of moth and the 2 butterflies are same but different sex. I think the moth is indistinct due to movement.

When I switched to the E-M5 there weren't so many about. I caught this one but it needed way too much sharpening. It's also more or less a crop and before I tried using the 1:1 switch.



This one was hand held 1/8 sec exposure - pure luck but I did use the 1:1 trick so focus was quick and ok. 2 others had too much shake.



The 60mm lens is capable of capturing plenty of detail. This one also focused from the 1:1 setting but the bugs had mostly gone at this point. It's on a buttercup.



John
-

[Shadowman]

Nice series.

[Geoff F]

Macro photography is a tricky and rather specialised subject, John.

Even with your rather narrow apertures your focus depth is very shallow. Looking at the Exif details I see that you only have around 3 mm of sharp focus so when hand holding it is very easy to slip out of focus by just one mm. Which is why I always use a tripod.

Auto focus is another potential problem. Too often it will prefer to focus on a sharper edged object instead of a soft bodied insect, particularly if it is closer to the camera than your intended subject. Even when it does focus on the target it will often focus on the 'wrong area'. For example, just like portraits of people, if you have the eyes sharp it doesn't really matter if the tail is slightly out of focus.

I almost always use manual focus but when I do use autofocus I just use the centre focusing point.

But I am working with a large macro lens; and virtually always on a tripod. My new Sigma 180 macro lens does have stabilisation which will just about allow for hand held use; but with a lot of rejects.

However, regarding these particular images.

#1 might be Eristalis horticola, otherwise a rather dark E. pertinax. The edge of the leaf seems sharper than the insect so I wonder if this was one of those false focus problems.

#3 is an Orange Tip butterfly. These are always tricky so this one has worked well.

#4 & 6 are Caddis Flies. It looks as though you have totally wobbled out of range here.

The snail looks like another slight false focus.

#9 the Green Shieldbugs have come out fairly well. They are very difficult to correctly expose due to reflections from their shiny surfaces. I'm only successful when I am able to shoot in light shade.

#10 Myathropa florae and #11 Helophilus penduls are a fraction on the dark side which is easy to correct with an editing tweak. I normally prefer to shoot a fraction on the dark side then correct with editing. With #11 you have good focus on the head so you can get away with the tail being a little out of focus.

#12 Xylota segnis is another which is particularly difficult to correctly expose in sunlight. I normally use flash for these when shooting in sunlight to even out the light a bit.

#13 the Dung Fly, I think, has exposed and focused well.

#14 & 15 the Speckled Wood butterfly has worked OK.

The second shot of the second posting is the really interesting beast; but impossible to be sure of identification from that image.

When shooting live insects I try to arrange for something around 1/200 and F11 to F16 by adjusting the Iso to suit. Or use flash and vary the flash compensation after setting the camera manually.

[Downrigger]

Interesting series - interesting technical issues as well. Thanks for this and thanks to Geoff for some useful analysis. Would be interested in seeing what the Sigma 180 macro can do.

[Geoff F]

A bigger lens enables you to shoot from a greater distance, Mark, which is better for those nervous subjects. But in theory, a smaller lens with less magnification should give even better fine details; providing you can actually get close enough. Flowers are a much easier subject.

Anyhow, my recent macro images have been taken with that larger Sigma, on a tripod. For example this thread:

Even Insects do it!

[ajohnw]

Thanks Geoff. I'd guess the Green Shields were doing it as well. At one angle they looked like they had teeth but I couldn't get a decent shot.

I can try adding a 1.4x converter to the Sigma lens. Also an extension tube but the only one they make is a 25mm and I wonder if that would be too much. I've also just ordered a suitable flash gun. The Olympus metering tends to reflect actual light conditions rather well - too well in some ways. The flash should help with that. In the end I went for a small Metz unit having been assured that it's fully compatible with the E-M5 and the E-620.

I had some misgivings about a 60mm macro lens when I bought it - rather short working distance. One answer to that is to switch on the 2x digital converter. This is a lot lot better than some might expect. I tried it on some moon shots. The main idea of this lens anyway was something that takes up very little room in the bag. At times I'm out for a day, take the camera and have no idea what I might find. I also view macro as anything that is to be displayed well over life size. While the reviews state not the best macro lens ever it's still pretty sharp and better than zooms that get to this length. Actually in terms of lines per picture height it's up there with crop cameras.

Useful exercise for me anyway. How many pixels I need under the subjects and what I can expect from the E-620's IS. Most of my previous experience with this sort of thing was on film with a 50mm lens plus reversal ring or extension tubes and a bit with bellows. I also did some 100mm macro lens work with my Pen - To ensure precise focus I had to use a 7x magnified view, difficult to frame well or see if all of the insect is in focus.

I did use the centre cross point AF. It's pretty precise via the viewfinder which on the E-620 is rather small. People adapt a Pentax view finder magnifier to fix that. It's better than the Olympus one. This still leaves the AF focuses onto things rather than into them problem wasting some depth of field.

Not sure on DOF. There was a time when macro lenses came with actual DOF tables but they don't seem to now. I suspect the usual calculators are seriously out at maco distances as they all use thin lens approximations. I just based things around F11 based on previous playing around. A use for aperture priority at last, I generally use P mode and dial what I want but with insects coming and going rather rapidly at times it's too slow.

John
-

[Geoff F]

Several items there, John.

Most people, once they gain a bit of experience and confidence tend to use Aperture Priority as their default setting. You are in complete control of your camera then.

Extension tubes are OK in that they will get you closer to your subject hence a larger image. But that probably won't help you as you have lenses which already focus fairly close. Tubes are more use when attached to one of the larger zooms which have some sort of macro option; but that still means something like 3 ft minimum distance.

I would say that a 25 mm tube is actually the minimum requirement. Kenko also make tubes which work well, providing they are available for your camera.

Often I use a 1.4x converter on my macro lens which does work well. Going up to x2 is possibly a bit more problematic and you could lose autofocus unless you have an F2.8 lens.

Flash can be very useful but it can also cause a lot of problems until you work out some suitable settings. I normally set the camera manually to suit the scene then use some flash output compensation as required on the through the lens metering mode. Some experimentation will be required.

Those smaller lenses should work fine for flowers etc. I often switch to my 24-70 lens for that sort of scene because it gives a better depth of focus and 70 mm is sufficient.

I suspect that shooting on a tripod is the one thing that will give you the biggest increase in quality. I always use some form of quick grip ball head which works more efficiently for those quick shots than having to fiddle around with a couple of separate adjustments.

[ajohnw]

The Olympus 60mm macro lens is the one I should concentrate on using. As it comes the 1:1 setting has a working distance of 90mm. I have seen comments that it's longer but haven't actually measured it. As I see it extension tubes and converters mostly gain in the ability to achieve the same magnification but at a longer working distance. They can also be used to gain more magnification but for hand held use I feel that isn't on. I'm confident that the IS even in a better class of Pen can cope with magnifications around 2:1. The IS in the OMD's can cope with more variations in the type of shake so should be better. Auto focus or a magnified view has to be used with these cameras - a "bit" of a problem. On the other hand focus check is available on Olympus lenses - touch the focus ring and the view is magnified. I can also use extension tubes but not converters. A lot to try before I give up on hand held.

DOF is another problem. Not too sure that I trust certain calculators. I came across this the other day which is of some interest to me anyway.



It's a java applet and can be downloaded from the site shown. Linux users just need to change the supplied dot bat file to a dot sh. It seems to be mostly aimed at photomacrography people. Need to check that. These people are likely to adopt a different attitude about circles of confusion - they are more interested in maximising resolution so the dof seem to be related to the maximum resolution that a given sensor can achieve. The default table goes up to 40x. Long before that stacking has to be used on just about all subjects to get any sort of DOF especially as far as the sensor is concerned. The table is of interest to me from a microscope type perspective but he also gives the formulae for CofC calculations on the site.

I have to respond to comments about P mode Geoff. It does give complete control of the camera and is very suitable for what I usually photograph. Obviously aperture priority is best for situations where DOF is critical and many shots are taken in different lighting conditions but the same settings would be available in P mode. Similarly if say I went somewhere to shoot cars racing in some fashion or the other speed priority might be a good idea as again many shots and differing light conditions but once again the same settings would be available in P mode. The only difference in both cases really is that P mode may need more clicks of the thumb wheel. It's a fact going on some comments that have cropped up on here some people are not even aware of what P mode does other than maybe it comes up with a speed / aperture combination based around light levels. The thumb wheel allows all possible combinations of these to selected at the current ISO setting so a speed / aperture decision is made every time a shot is taken - or the preset is just accepted. As Ken Rockwell seems to have mentioned P stands for Professional mode.

John
-

[DanK]

I almost always use manual focus but when I do use autofocus I just use the centre focusing point.

I agree with Geoff about this. Except with single-point, AF is not reliable for macro work.

A 60mm lens is not optimal, but it is usable with a small format camera. I used a 60mm with a 1.6 crop for some time, for example:



You just end up with fewer keepers. 100mm is much better length. Some people go longer yet, but I don't.

For chasing bugs, I find a tripod too slow. I usually use a monopod, and I generally do fine focusing by rocking slightly forward or back, rather than by changing the focus point of the lens. If you use diffused flash, you will freeze motion, which helps, and you will have enough light to use a reasonably narrow aperture. My most common bug hunting settings are: diffused flash, 1/125, f/13.

[ajohnw]

I feel the same about tripods Dan. Monopods I will try at some point but oh for one with instant height adjustment via a single twist lock - probably only last 5mins if some one made one.

I had a pretty good success rate on spider and butterflies using a manual focus and aperture 100mm 2:1 lens on a Pen. The biggest problem with that set up was having to use a magnified view (7x) and focusing by camera movement by hand. Lots of times the spider didn't finish up entirely in the frame and it was also difficult to focus in the correct place - even small spider bodies are huge with a view representing 14x total on m 4/3. Flash also helped a lot as often I could rely mainly on that for light levels which really does help minimise shake.

The E-M5 has single point focus - where ever I want but I always leave it central. There is an update available now that makes it even smaller. The biggest problem with this camera is that continuous AF seems to be a good option but Olympus threw in tracking as well. This is fine on many subjects but on some it may switch to tracking something else which can be frustrating at times. It doesn't need an awful lot of contrast to track either. There is a lot to try. For instance a 25mm extension tube will shift 0.5x to near 1x and should virtually double the working distance. I vaguely remember an option in the menu's to only expose when the subject is in focus could be useful IF they maintain the view. The lens also has a rather long working distance for a 60mm. Focusing at F2.8 helps get a more even depth of field when working at the usual macro apertures but I do wonder if longer and slower would make much difference in practice. The 100mm macro lens was an F4.

On Geoff's comment about wobble taking the snail and the insect that I thought was a moth I'm pretty sure in the case of the snail it's an IS effect. The moth like critter had gone as soon as I took the shot so might be down to it moving. Basically I don't think I could move the camera that quickly and get a sort of double image while the exposure is in progress. I'd just get a blur. I had some on the long exposure time one which I took 3 times and posted the most successful one. The other 2 were hopeless. Not that I will complain about an IS effect like this. Loosing it would be much worse. The long exposures were on the E-M5. I wouldn't have stood a chance with the E-620.

I'm currently looking at dismantling one of Olympus's small plug in powered by the camera flash guns. I intend to stick the flash head itself on the end of a small articulated telescopic aerial. I'd like to reroot the wires but can't see how they assembled that aspect. Getting the head off was easy.

John
-

[Brownbear]

Hi John,

Just to say that the I think #9 (green shields) is a beautiful capture! Nice detail and focus in #14 the butterfly sitting on the pink flower. A beautiful, just right pink