Any experiences with a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro on a 400D ?

[wise]

No, I don`t lose hope. I`ll try again tomorrow.

This one was shot with AF and the first one with manual focussing.

 

[keith204]

You are shooting a MACRO shot at f/2.8 and f/3.5 - it keeps coming to this - tighten up the aperture - like f/11 or so, and keep the place will let enough to get a 1/100 or better shutter speed - you will be impressed. I am surprised #1 at f/2.8 came out with that sharp edge, and that DOF looks similar to what the DOF looks like when I shoot an object that size at f/2.8 with the 100 macro.

 

[wise]

Yes, I`ll try.

 

[Overread]

With macro its always best to stick to manual focusing - its more acurate and you can define where you want the focus - AF even on a single focusing point (and the only decent one in the 400D is the middle one) is just not good enough and limits you creativly.

 

[JustAnEngineer]

f/9.3 is the aperture which provides the sharpest possible image with the EOS 400D's 10.1 MP sensor. At smaller apertures, diffraction gradually begins to become a factor. f/11 should still be decent. The extremely sharp EF 100mm f/2.8 USM lens should be at least as sharp as the camera's sensor at f/9.

 

[Josh66]

f/9.3 is the aperture which provides the sharpest possible image with the EOS 400D's 10.1 MP sensor.

Please elaborate... How do you figure this out, and how could I apply it to other sensors?

 

[JustAnEngineer]

There's some complicated formula to relate the Nyquist frequency, aperture, diffraction, etc to the sensor's pixel size. I just look it up on the web.

Here's one spot where I've seen it:
Canon EOS 50D Digital SLR Camera Review

 

[Montana]

I use that lens and my backup camera is the 400D. You need light. That way you can get a faster shutter and smaller aperture. Simple as that. Get some lamps or flash, anything. Get some light in there so you can get your camera settings right for close-up work.

Derrick

 

[Montana]

Another thing, Google "homemade light box". For less then 2 bucks, you can make a light box at home, use a desk lamp, and get nice diffused light.

Derrick

 

[Josh66]

Here's one spot where I've seen it:
Canon EOS 50D Digital SLR Camera Review

Thanks!

 

[wise]

I just tried with the tripod. The results are remarkably better, but still not satisfying. However that is not due to the lense, but due to the lack of a softer lighting and more even petals I guess. I wanted to achieve an effect like this: on Flickr - Photo Sharing!. But I am still far away from that.

Here are some of my new shots:

20s, f/16

2,5s, f/16

6s, f/11

and finally one which looks nice at least

1/80s, f/2,8

 

[wise]

Thanks Derrik. I think I will try to make my own light box. It`s exactly what I need. The direct lighting is just too harsh.

 

[Overread]

Also try getting a few folds of toilet paper (white) and having them held in front of the shutter - if you use elastic bands make sure they don't cover the flash element. This can help to diffuse the light from a flash.

 

[wise]

Thanks Overread. Maybe I give this a try, but not today. I just dismantled my photo setup.