How best to shoot rockpools/reefs/tanks?

[William W]

I need to learn a lot about all these crazy terms I've been seeing you pros throw around.

What technical terms do you not understand?

***

. . . Should I be looking at the D3200 like I have been doing? One deal is $280 USD for "NEW" Nikon D3200 w/ the standard 18/55mm lens, factory reburished + 90 day Nikon warranty. . .

You’ll probably want to buy a Macro Lens and a Tripod and Head at the very least, so you need to factor those into your budget.

I forgot to mention that it would be nice if the camera had LIVE VIEW or similar (for critical Focusing) and also a retractable/swing- out Monitor Screen (for ease of Focusing in live view when the camera is on odd positions) would be useful. I don’t know if that camera has those two facilities.

I think that the solution need not be a DSLR.

I am not necessarily opposed to the idea of a bridge camera being a very good option for you. I would like it to be able to capture raw and I think that the point about the long Working Distance that I raised above requires adequate investigation.

But I really don’t think you should rush in and buy anything just at the moment.


***

. . . Now, as for focusing on the details of my "coral" I can't seem to get it correct with my fuji. I understand there is a lot of practice necessary . . .

As for being 6" closer to the subject.. that will be the main application. Sometimes I may want toke pictures a bit farther but I guess I could always zoom a bit and crop.. lose a bit of quality there but I guess it's always a give or take relationship.

I think that Kathy and (I know that) I hold a fairly strong opinion that is predicated on giving advice so we do not encourage people to assume that buying more gear will necessarily solve the issues that they encounter.

So (now speaking for myself only) – I never stated nor was I ever suggesting: "don’t buy anything else– just use your Fuji" . . .

What I am stating (bluntly and this is just as one example) is this:

If you haven’t mastered the skills of Manually Focusing using the Fuji X100s to get a submerged Object in good focus at a Shooting Distance of about 6 inches, then buying a DSLR and a Macro Lens (or any other camera) will probably not fix that.

Moreover I honestly don’t think buying something else at the moment will make the task of Manual Focusing (and also other tasks like White Balance; Critical Focusing; Lighting) any easier for you to master, when you have a perfectly good tool with which to hone your skills and learn more about what are the specific design requirements of the camera/lens/lighting that you really require.

WW



By the way and simply as an example of practicing -

I submerged a Flower in a glass of water:



The leaf is about the size of my pinkie. The glass was CURVED (that means a much more difficult shooting scenario than if the glass were FLAT).

I then made two photos using my Fuji X100s, one from the side, shooting through the glass and also shooting through the water and the second shot shooting from above only shooting through the water.

These were made using the Marco Mode and the Working Distance was 6 inches.

The object of the exercise was simply to attain good focus on the front of the flower in each photo.

I used Manual Focus, looking through the EVF and using the magnified assistance.

Both photos are JPEG SOOC (Jpeg file Straight Out Of Camera), and each has been cropped as would be necessary to get the equivalent of about 1:1 magnification in the final image.

The top photo was pulled at: F/16 @ 1/250s @ ISO320 and I used a Tripod.

The bottom photo was pulled at: F/11 @ 1/500s @ ISO320 and the camera was hand held – critical focusing was achieved by moving the camera position in and out, not using the Manual Focus Ring on the camera. It required two attempts to get the Hand Held shot.

Here are the results:



WW

[jcuknz]

John:

Please explain how you extrapolate that the first image posted in response #9 and which clearly labeled "JPEGS SOOC . . Macro Mode . . . WD = 80mm" is a: "wide shot not close up".

I think that having the front element of the lens of a camera 80mm from the Object is a "close-up", and certainly not "laughable".

I think it was quite clear that being labelled "JPEG SOOC" there was no cropping and also the second shot shows clearly the linear measurement of the fish indicating that the magnification of the first image is about 1:3

BTW, you seem to have a reoccurring habit of using emotive words (for example describing the image example "laughable") rather than just stating that you believe it is a wide shot and not a close up shot and seeking further explanation and or discussion.

I have no 'gripe' with you and respect your ability but in this case I will repeat a phrase I came up with years ago
"A wideshot of a mountain is taken from five miles and WS of a watch from 5cm"
I know this conflicts with television practice where WS,MS and CU have specific framings which always puzzled me as being not very good, though understandable in the context.

What you shot was a wide shot in the context of the discussion when you read what the OP wrote regarding the subject in the first photo.

So why I laughed was because the camera subject distance is irrelevant and it is subject size in the frame. Your shot merely confirms my original statement that the OP started with the wrong camera and thank you Kathy for agreeing with me regarding the use of the long lens. I see a short lens being only really suitable for back lit subjects such as copying transparencies. Though I guess many buy short macro lens for ecconomy having not learnt the way to take tight framed shots with a longer lens from a distance.

My apology to you Bill if I ruffled your feathers here and previously when you contradict my firm beliefs

[jcuknz]

A comment on Bill's #21
While live view is supposed to be good for focusing there is a possible problem with cameras using focus by wire systems in that with the refresh rate[ the way the camera replaces one image with a slightly different one ] stops one accurately focusing due to the delay with what you saw and what it really is. Actually my opinion is it is more the re-action time of a human being.
As a result I have greater faith in my camera's AF system than my manual focusing PROVIDED that you have a camera with a very small focusing area like my Panasonic bridge and MFT cameras have. Here I think I select a very small subject size relative to the frame much as I would if using a focusing screen .... of course some think the small size detracts from accuracy ... such are the divergent opinions in this hobby as Bill and I have demonstrated in previous posts here

There is another way to get tightly framed shots which is with an interchangeable lens camera to use extension tubes.
Here one is increasing the 'extension' of the lens to permit it to focuds closer than the leens maker designed it to do.
If you have ever seen an old time [ or modern version] bellows camera where the front moves forward to focus closer
The macro lens is a relatively modern convienience tool, and expensive of course, but increasing extension is how old timers learnt to take tightly framed shots .... that's ME by the way

The most extension I achieved was when I wanted to copy part of a 16mm film frame and only had my old Pentax 35mm SLR ... but I did have two sets of extension tubes ... one on the camera and the other on the lens and loosely held together with a length of plastic pipe. I worked in my dark cellar with the film held in a 16mm projector gate I had with the light behind it.

Finally a comment about the underwater tube ... paint the inside black and avoid having the camera in any light as depending on the set-up the camera will photograph itself .... as I learnt the hard way copying film negatives
It would help if the front of the camera lens is as close as possible to the barrier to the water .... whatever you use ... I am sure when my TV station's mechanical genious made an underwater housing he just used plain glass. Natural History Unit film about underwater life in Otago Harbour. [ decades ago now ]

[jcuknz]

A funny story against me on the small focusing area.
For the past few months I have lamented to myself the loss of the small target area and just a couple od days ago I was fiddling with my camera and moved a lever I have not touched in ages and back has come the small focus area ... I had searched the multitude of menus to no avail and by accident and 'fidling' I now have it back.
No use reading the manual as it is half an inch thick and small print

[William W]

Thank you for replying and explaining your “firm beliefs”. Thank you for explaining why you interpreted my example image as laughable. On the point of your apology, thank you – that’s all fine and the matter is now forgotten.

I agree that you do use the technical term “Wide Shot” to mean something entirely different to how that term is usually applied in mainstream Photography, Cine and Video usage.

***

. . . So why I laughed was because the camera subject distance is irrelevant and it is subject size in the frame . . .

This is totally confusing to me. But I am happy to remain confused in regard to your point of view and just leave our particular conversation at the point of you view and my confusion of it here - :

If (as I think you are saying) the relevant consideration is “subject size in the frame” (in other words the technical term in mainstream Photography usage would be ‘magnification’): - - -

Then, I note that the image of the fish - is quite large in the frame.

The distance across the top of the fish is about 75mm and the sensor width of the Fuji Camera is about 23mm –

That shot is about 1:3 magnification: which is a “close-up shot”. (or if you like "a large amount of the subject size in the frame").

WW

[jcuknz]

We all have different learning paths and I have been fortunate to go through the bridge camera with its fixed lens system, though now mostly use MFT ILC, so the concept of using a CU lens to overcome design deficiencies of the long lens is 'normal' though obviously not to one who normally uses an ILC such as you Bill where the macro lens is the 'way to go'.
The Fiji cameras too is a fixed lens I gather but of the simple single or short zoom range without the flexibility of the long reach bridge so is not the best for some subjects such as this which a bridge would hose in on

I have been using a long zoom camera with moderate CU lens accessory for nearly a decade now and only slowly coming around to extension tubes as a prefered way to work

[jcuknz]

When you have the ability to fill the sensor with a 38mm across subject the 75mm is relatively a wide shot .... context!

[ffd]

Great pictures

[William W]

. . . We all have different learning paths and I have been fortunate to go through the bridge camera with its fixed lens system, though now mostly use MFT ILC, so the concept of using a CU lens to overcome design deficiencies of the long lens is 'normal' though obviously not to one who normally uses an ILC such as you Bill where the macro lens is the 'way to go'. . .

As mentioned previously John, I am more than comfortable to agree to disagree with many of your points of view.

I am also quite comfortable to agree to disagree with these recent extrapolations of what you think I think and, moreover what you think is the sum of my experience (upon which you have commented before).

What I think would be useful to Johnny has been articulated clearly in my posts in this conversation.

And (simply by the way) you are totally wrong: my experience with digital bridge cameras is quite extensive and any assumption that you know more about my experience than I, is simply an absurdity.

WW

[jcuknz]

Johnny ... if you go to my thread about playing with under water you may get some ideas.

But regarding getting a DSLR based on the little I know about underwater is a NO NO to me simply because a simple open box with a glass wall will get you level pictures under water as it did for the NHU way back and for this it would be desirable to have a swing up LCD.
For me working with the Olympus was a PITB becuase like many DSLRs it has a fixed screen while with my GH2 and its fully articulated LCD screen I am positioning it to be comfortable.

You have been warned against full frame DSLRs for their reduced depth of field and the opposite is the small sensored P&S or bridge camera so my intermediate choice of Micro Four Thirds is on the low side for greater DoF but with the quality of the DSLR at the size you have suggested you want. And I know all being equal I could easilly make 15x12 inch prints off my better shots if I wanted the expense.

But with my MFT I have the x10 zoom which largely gives me the bridge camera I used in the past. Sacrificing some reach 430mm > 280mm for the larger sensor 17mm x13mm instead of 7mm x5mm which enables me to safely work [ IQ wise] at higher ISO when required. That is possibly another point against an older APS-C camera that they may not be as good at higher ISO but I have only read complaints from owners rather than actual experience . I gave my DSLR away once I got my original G3, a fantastic camera like Kathy has, as its purpose was to be able to change lenses like I did in film days.

[Stagecoach]

Johnny, as always with the type of question you have posed there will be differing views.

Johnny ... if you go to my thread about playing with under water you may get some ideas.

But regarding getting a DSLR based on the little I know about underwater is a NO NO to me simply because a simple open box with a glass wall will get you level pictures under water as it did for the NHU way back and for this it would be desirable to have a swing up LCD.
For me working with the Olympus was a PITB becuase like many DSLRs it has a fixed screen while with my GH2 and its fully articulated LCD screen I am positioning it to be comfortable.

As an experienced DSLR user but also someone that has never attempted to take an image of a small subject underwater I gave it a go tonight. I knocked up a scenario with some small gravel, tiny weeds from the garden and a shell in a round deep pyrex dish. The gravel was covered with 3 inches of water.

Using a Nikon D300 (12 megapixel 8 year old technology) plus 105mm Macro lens, no articulating screen, manual focusing because you need total control of what you want sharpest, an average tripod with central column, timed release and a desk light lying on its side shining below the water level here's the results.







The shell is 3 inches long which will give an idea of the sizes, none of the images were cropped and my working distances were roughly lens front between 6 inches and 24 inches from the gravel. Only very basic PP done to the images.

Basically, these sort of results are extremely easy to get.

[jcuknz]

Oly/Pany .. the difference between what Noah invented and what the geeks give us today

Good results but no scale included to judge for what Johnny asked for ... I am sure Johnny is getting similar with his Fuji but wants more. After my efforts I am sure I don't have the answer. Perhaps asking the photographer who took the shots is worth a try?

Just as I couldn't see the point of a card reader until I got one so others with fixed LCDs do not know what they are missing ... whereas I have had one since I got my Nikon bridge in 2005 and feel hard done by using the EPL-1

[Stagecoach]

Oly/Pany .. the difference between what Noah invented and what the geeks give us today

I wonder if Noah considered fuel efficiency, hull resistance, stability and speed to the same degree as the 'geeks' are fortunately able to do these days?

Good results but no scale included to judge for what Johnny asked for

Shooting distances and shell scale of 3 inches given along with APS-C/105mm macro lens magnification details in previous posting.

so others with fixed LCDs do not know what they are missing ... whereas I have had one since I got my Nikon bridge in 2005

Some of us others are grateful for missing those additional metal bits prone to corrosion in high humidity and salty atmospheres.

[jcuknz]

Not too worried about corrosion etc and my lovely little Nikon seems as good today as when bought in 2005 though of course at 5Mp misses out against my 12 Mp and 16Mp cameras, particularly the last one
I guess it depends on how one looks after ones' gear though my wife's Panasonic FZ3 has been chucked on the floor of the car twice in my horrified presence and still working good as gold ... only 3MP of course but all she needs.
When we were photographing spray from breaking waves on the promenade I watched for problems and turned my back against them ... others just get caught Pro v. Amateurs? My cameras live in their cases except when being used, hers rarely though she was given one with the camera.

[jcuknz]

Not too worried about corrosion etc and my lovely little Nikon seems as good today as when bought in 2005 though of course at 5Mp misses out against my 12 Mp and 16Mp cameras, particularly the last one
I guess it depends on how one looks after ones' gear though my wife's Panasonic FZ3 has been chucked on the floor of the car twice in my horrified presence and still working good as gold ... only 3MP of course but all she needs.
When we were photographing spray from breaking waves on the promenade I watched for problems and turned my back against them ... others just get caught



Pro v. Amateurs? My cameras live in their cases except when being used, hers rarely though she was given one with the camera. I have written about 'fashion accessories' swinging from the shoulder before ... probably only entry level DSLRs but still finely crafted precision items all the same.

[snemet]

Hey guys,
Over the last 8 months i have been conducting a little experiment to measure the temperature of rock pools around the Western Cape. It seems to fluctuate between 18 and 27degrees. Based on this i decided to start a rock pool tank
I have an empty 1.6x60wx70h tank that has been begging to be converted. I contacted Frans at Dorry Pets CPT and he came over to do a coquegsm consult on what exactly we want with the tank. We decided to build a new stand that will be 1m high to allow for better viewing. This will also give us sufficient space for a nice sized sump – 1.5x50x50
Frans will deliver the new stand and sump tomorrow (21/05/2010). The drilling, building overflows, plumbing etc will be done on Monday.
I plan on building a dump surge device that will use +- 120L.
Lighting will be 8x 54watt T5s – which can be upgraded in 15 minutes.