2018 Project 52, 1st quarter by Rudi

[rudi]

My theme for 2018 is 'Extreme Macro'.

I have been shooting macro as long as I remember. After trying out all different kind of macro stuff, I finally tried the canon mpe-65mm f2,8 1-5x macro lens, somewhere in 2014 I believe, and to my surprise I found it very manageable, ready to dive in the 'extreme macro' world. With some good technique it is for sure 'handholdable'.

Unforseen circumstances kept me from shooting as much as I wanted with the canon-mpe 65mm lens. So in the past 3 years, I dabbled a little bit with this lens, nothing serious though, and with varying succes.

My goal for this year is to take my extreme macro's to the next level !!!

When I say 'handholdable', I mean that the camera/lens is usually resting on some support, being it my arm, a chair, a stone, a beanbag, a wall...(you get the idea), no fixed setup using a tripod...., so strickly this is maybe not handheld....

What is 'extreme macro' ?
I agree with the definition given by Johan J. Ingles-Le Nobel (http://extreme-macro.co.uk/)
where he says:
"There is no standard definition for extreme macro, but there is a tentative definition which gives some insight into its unusual nature. Macro photography (1:1) is usually pursued using off the shelf lens and camera equipment, whilst microphotography (10:1+) is undertaken using microscope equipment. Extreme macro covers the range between the two, and borrows apparatus used by both specialties to make images."

[Urbanflyer]

I really look forward to seeing your photos. Years ago, with film, I spent some time with a bellows for extreme macro. Loved it! Am thinking about getting back to it at some point.

[Dave Humphries]

That lens Rudi, is the one thing I envy Canon for, wish Nikon made one.
... and no, before anyone suggests it, I'm not gonna swap systems now

Good luck with the challenge,
Dave

[Shadowman]

Can't wait to see what you come up with.

[rudi]

Thanks Judith, Dave and John for the comments.

That lens Rudi, is the one thing I envy Canon for,......., I'm not gonna swap systems now Dave

Maybe a lens mount adapter will do the trick...

[rudi]

In the past, I created some handheld stacks from live bugs in the field. Every time I found a cooperatif suitable subject I tried to get as close as possible.
Though I got better with a lot off practice, it was mostly a 'hit and mis' thing.
I have posted this pictures before, just to 'refresh' and to compensate for my late start to the project here are two off those pictures:
1:Aphid Stack; Exif: 7D, canon mpe at 2x, f11, 1/250, iso 100, diffused flash, 11 pictures stacked.



2:Feather Midge (Probably Chironomus (Camptochironomus)) Stack; Exif 5DIII, canon 100mm at abt 1x, f8, 1/100, iso 400, difused flash, 16 pictures stacked.

[Urbanflyer]

In the past, I created some handheld stacks from live bugs in the field. Every time I found a cooperatif suitable subject I tried to get as close as possible.
Though I got better with a lot off practice, it was mostly a 'hit and mis' thing.
I have posted this pictures before, just to 'refresh' and to compensate for my late start to the project here are two off those pictures:
1:Aphid Stack; Exif: 7D, canon mpe at 2x, f11, 1/250, iso 100, diffused flash, 11 pictures stacked.



2:Cranefly Stack; Exif 5DIII, canon 100mm at abt 1x, f8, 1/100, iso 400, difused flash, 16 pictures stacked.

nice!

[rudi]

Thanks Judith, the real challenge starts now...

[Shadowman]

Nice set, this should be an interesting 52 series.

[rudi]

Week 4:For shooting static subjects, I made a fixed setup end off 2016 . Picture included. For anyone interested, you can find better, more sophisticated setups here ( http://www.photomacrography.net/foru...pic.php?t=7298 ) and scroll down the page. I played a few times with this setup and it worked well up to 1:1 magnification.
My first setup, first subject in red circle, being a female flower of Corylus (Hazel)


A picture for comparison, the red styles are about 1 mm long.


Well, now my first subject gave me some extra problems (to be expected off course ), being stepsize and vibrations. So I had to change my setup a little bit.

Here is the first result. I would have liked more definition in the red styles though.
Exif: 5DIII canon mpe at 4x f5,6 1/100 iso100, diffused flash, stepsize +/- 0,1 mm, 68 shots stacked in Zerene and retouched from DMap.



C&C, ideas and suggestions much appreciated.

[rudi]

Lets hope John, for me at least...

... this should be an interesting 52 series.

[skitterbug]

Hi Rudi - Your P52 challenge is starting off with stunning pictures! Wow! I also appreciate that you gave us a look at your set up.
I have much to learn about macro work. Thank you for sharing your talent and pics!

[rudi]

Thanks Sandy. I try to post a picture when I 'update' my setup.

Hi Rudi - Your P52 challenge is starting off with stunning pictures! Wow! I also appreciate that you gave us a look at your set up.
I have much to learn about macro work. Thank you for sharing your talent and pics!

[Geoff F]

Very good images, Rudi, but I do have one bit of doubt.

Is that really a Cranefly? Possibly looks more like some form of Midge to me ?

For the past two years I have been attempting to learn cranefly identification, after attending a two day course on the subject. And after all that time, all I can say is that it is certainly is a difficult subject. Now, I can identify a handful of craneflies with reasonable certainty and get to family level with a few more.

But there are hundreds of craneflies in just the UK and I tend to leave midges, etc, well alone.

[Artshot]

Interesting stuff, besides the great photos. I really like to see how it's done.

[Wavelength]

Great looking images!!!

[rudi]

Thanks Geoff, Art and Nandakumar to leave a comment.

Very good images, Rudi, but I do have one bit of doubt.

Is that really a Cranefly? Possibly looks more like some form of Midge to me ?....

Well, that particular picture is in my "TO ID" folder, under "DANCEFLY(??)" !! Not sure about that though. Prior to this posting I had been browsing my "Cranefly" folder. Hence perhaps the lapsus.
Thanks for pointing this out Geoff!! I will come back as soon as I have a proper ID.

Interesting stuff, besides the great photos. I really like to see how it's done.

More pictures from my setup in upcoming posts....

[rudi]

Very good images, Rudi, but I do have one bit of doubt.

Is that really a Cranefly? Possibly looks more like some form of Midge to me ?....

ID : Female Feather Midge, Probably Chironomus (Camptochironomus).

[Geoff F]

I thought the wing veins looked a bit 'simple' for a cranefly, Rudi, but the keys are somewhat tortuous and rely on close examination of wing veins to navigate between several rather similar options; and that is just to reach basic family level.

That family, I assume, has extremely feathery antennae for the males.

[rudi]

......That family, I assume, has extremely feathery antennae for the males.

Yes they do have Geoff. I was looking in my folders for a nice feathered male to post, but they are not good enough. So still on my 'most wanted' list.