macro and DOF

Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by magicmonkey, Mar 15, 2006.

  1. magicmonkey

    magicmonkey TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    Well I'm stumped, I just can't seem to get a decent DOF when doing macro work, not even at f22 with a 30 second exposure, I'm just starting to do a little macro work so I know very little about it, is it impossible to get a large DOF in macro or am I just being silly?:blushing:
     
  2. Rob

    Rob TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    6,217
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    London
    What are you using to get a macro picture?

    Rob
     
  3. magicmonkey

    magicmonkey TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    Sorry, should have said! I'm using a Cannon 350D with a Sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 mounted on a cheap and cheerful tripod...
     
  4. spiky_simon

    spiky_simon TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    You're not being silly, but it's very hard to get decent DOF on macro images beacuse you're working so close. If you check out other photographers' images, you'll find that small (tiny!) depths of field are commonplace.

    The lens you're using, while it will work as a macro, is not a dedicated macro lens - if you're enjoying your macro work, you might like to consider a deicated macro lens. i have that lens and you have to put it right at the top end of the zoom to put it into macro mode, which makes the working distance pretty massive!
     
  5. magicmonkey

    magicmonkey TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    yeah, the working distance on this shot was about 4-5 feet away!

    [​IMG]

    I don't really have any money to spare on lenses at the moment so short of winning the lottery I think I'm just going to have to put up with the short DOf and try to work the composition around it, bit of a pain really as I'd like this shot if the stamen was in focus but as it stands it's just one for deleting.
     
  6. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,817
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    There are several different ways to do "macro" photography.

    A real "macro lens" as mentions is probably on of the best ways...but it's expensive.

    You could use extension tubes, with a lens that you already have. They let you achieve focus at a closer distance.

    You could use close up filters on the front of a lens that you already have. They are cheaper than a macro lens or tubes but image quality will suffer a little or a lot, depending on the quality. I've got a set of them, they are OK for my needs.

    You could even reverse mount one lens onto another. You can even buy "macro coupler rings" which let you screw to lenses front-to-front with the filter threads.
     
  7. magicmonkey

    magicmonkey TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    Yeah, way too expensive for my unfortunately, even my best friend (ebay) is way too expensive!

    Tubes doesn't sound like a bad idea, what affect does it have on the image quality though?

    Coupler rings sounds horrible! I'd be worried that the filter rings wouldn't hold the weight of the lens and end up tearing thhemselves apart! How would you go about reversing lenses without a coupler ring? Would it litteraly be just holding one lens infront of the other? Obviously different combinations of lenses would work differently so which would give the best results?

    Sorry, far too many questions her now!!! :blushing: :confused:
     
  8. Rob

    Rob TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    6,217
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    London
    Front to back coupling (ooh err missus) isn't too bad actually. I've used rubber bands in the past!! ;)

    Rob
     
  9. magicmonkey

    magicmonkey TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    That must have been a big rubber band! ;)
     
  10. airgunr

    airgunr TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Delavan, Wisconsin, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    When shooting macro your DOF is measured in fractions of an inch to maybe just over an inch even at your smallest apature. It is just the nature of the beast.
     
  11. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,817
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Since tubes don't add any glass in the path of light, the image quality should not be affected.


    Yes, it can be pretty delicate, but as the whole thing is on a tripod and not moving very much, it seems to be OK. I like to use a small prime lens (50mm) reversed onto another lens, so the weight on the coupler is as low as possible. Some people on this site have uses cardboard and tape to do this.
     
  12. airgunr

    airgunr TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    846
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Delavan, Wisconsin, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit

Share This Page