Purple Rain - Dewdrop Refractions

IanClark

IanClark

Messages
3,616
Edit My Images
No
These were about 2mm in diameter

Sigma 105 with 3 ext. tubes

790312656_McVXW-O.jpg
 
Last edited:
Lovely...I love seeing nice round drops like this, nice capture
 
WOW !!!!, this is great, hopefully i will be able to do shots like this , eventually!, really, really good, :clap::clap:
 
Thanks guys, very much appreciated. :)

Gazza, you'll be able to. Just a case of spotting them, holding exceptionally steady or getting a tripod in place (which isn't as easy as you might think :) ). I hand held this shot due to the droplets location.

Once you can get the focus steady, you're pretty much sorted. I used F14 to maximise dof on the droplets, 1/200 to minimise camera shake and external flash to freeze motion also as well as illuminate sufficiently.

Give it a go.
 
IanClark said:
I used F14 to maximise dof on the droplets, 1/200 to minimise camera shake and external flash to freeze motion also as well as illuminate sufficiently.

Give it a go.
Click to expand...

I'm a bit confused by this :shrug: I think I may get back to the books, I thought you'd need a lot lower f/number to get a shot like this
 
Hi Button,

Not in this case. A lower F stop (E.g F2.8) would create a very shallow depth of field which basically means much less of an area that is in focus. This is very useful for say, outdoor portraits where you want your subject to be nice and sharp yet have the background nicely blurred (bokeh). This is why when shooting landscapes, often they're done around F8 as this is where most lenses are at their best and the image is all in focus from foreground to background.

As you're so close to your subject with Macro, the area that is in focus is very very small. Use extension tubes and your effective area of focus is millimetres. In this case, it was probably about 3 or 4 mm. So, if we combined extreme close up with a wide aperture (F2.8), we'd get mostly an OOF image with a tiny tiny bit of area in focus - less than the subject.

Depth of field is relative to distance from the subject, focal length of the lens being used and the aperture also. Macro lens magnification also plays a part. E.g 105mm, set to F2.8, maximum magnification and also at it's closest focussing distance would result in almost none of the subject in focus. Using the minimal amount of magnification (which would result in the lens also being further away), would allow for more of the subject in focus but it would be much smaller overall. As mentioned regarding outdoor portraiture, you can happily use F2.8 or F4 because you're nowhere near as close to your subject as you would be with macro (incidentally, an F2.8 macro lens makes a great portrait lens) therefore, although you're minimising DoF, you have more of it (yup, it's confusing)

Again, as mentioned, if you use extension tubes to magnify subjects even more, your area of focus is even smaller.

To combat this, you need to use a much higher F Stop (smaller aperture). This allows for a larger depth of field and therefore, permits much more of the subject to be in focus.

Believe me, it's still millimetres but more is in focus. :)

The problem therein however, is that macro needs lots of light at the best of times so when you're magnifying even more, flash or very very strong lights are required.

I hope this is of some help. :)
 
Last edited:
Ian could you hear me cursing and throwing a strop :LOL:

I have been trying for most of the morning to do some refraction droplets with dismall results, having read your reply I'm off to try again.

I'm using a Tamron 28-300m so I should be able to achieve something half decent, shouldn't I:thinking:
 
Cheers Dave.

Breezy.. hehe, it can be done but there IS most certainly a level of frustration attached :D.
I wondered what the rumble in the air was. It was coming from Warwickshire.. heheh

I must admit, I've never used a telephoto lens for Macro but I know it most certainly can be done. What you'll find is that up close and personal, everything zooms around in the frame unless you're using a tripod. Even then, an adjustment of millimetres seems like inches. :)

Keep on at it and post up if you get something :)
 
Ohh now I'm even more confused - it ain't difficult:LOL:

The exact spec of the lens I'm using is 28-300m f3.5 - 6.3 Xr Di LD macro so is that different to the telephoto version - sorry, but I'm really crap at all the spec/tech stuff however hard I try to learn it all:( Would I be better off just using the kit lens, I have a Canon 400d.

Thank you btw for taking time to help, hopefully I won't be a complete lost cause!!
 
Hehe that lens should be ok :) don't use your kit lens as you can only shoot macro in auto mode and you will struggle.

My shots are taken with a 400D too
 
Okey doke, thanks Ian. Right I'm off to try again, will try and keep the 'rumblings' down this time:D
 
Ian thanks a million that is a great explanation it makes sense. Another silly question but why do you say not to use the kit lens? I use my kit lens because it is the closest focusing distance I can get.
 
Hi Button,

My apologies, the kit lens can be used. It just won't get up as close as you could do with a longer lens or macro lens but I understand you probably know this anyway :)

I guess I should be a little less direct about it. The kit lens can be used and it will produce good close up images. The main problem with using the kit lens is that you have to use the macro function which is a fully automatic function. That means it will choose your aperture and shutter speed for you which gives you much less control over the image.

Also, if you're up close and you have less light, the camera will automatically open the aperture and lengthen the shutter which might cause camera shake/motion blur.

The kit lens is actually a darn good lens (many would have you say it isn't) and can and does produce good images. When you try your shots, ensure you have lots of good light. if you can set a lamp up somewhere that would help.
 
hehe, The Sigma 105 is around £300 at the moment.

However, consider something else instead. Have a look on EBAY for some real cheap extension tubes. I know some have picked them up for around £5 - £10.

They are simple basic rings that fit onto the body of your camera and then your lens fits onto 1, 2 or all 3 of the extension tubes. They have no glass in them at all but what they do is to serve to move the optics of the lens further away from the sensor increasing magnification.

They will effectively turn your kit lens into a macro style lens. You will get much better magnification for a fraction of the cost. you can get different magnification by using single rings or a combination of the 3.

The only thing is that you will have to manually focus. However, macro should be done through manual focus anyway by adjusting the ring and then moving back and forwards into the focus area.
I have Kenko tubes with Auto-Focus function but I rarely use it :)

Plus you'd be able to use your "creative" modes on the camera. Preferably fully manual with a good light source and your flash.
 
Last edited:
Oh I was just reading about these extension tubes, I didn't realise they will be so cheap well they are more affordable than a new lens :-D
 
Indeed.

Then, when you get the chance for a dedicated macro lens, you can then put your tubes on that as well and get even more magnification (Check out my globular springtail post) :), but you'll certainly see an improvement with tubes on your kit lens.
 
Last edited:
damage said:
:eek::eek::nono: LoL

Just sounded a bit dubious mate. But on a serious note, Lets see it (y)
Click to expand...

Dude it is what you are thinking, and its probably not suitable for this forum. It was taken for a comp with a subject of song titles. Not a great shot but pulls of the brief perfectly.
 
Thanks again all, glad you like it


John, hehe, you should post it mate although I'm not sure it'd work in macro (and DO NOT read into that wrong.. hehehe)

As John says, the images are for a fun only comp elsewhere and the theme was song titles - hence Purple Rain
Johns is quite a humorous one :)

As for not suitable. Of course it is :) Photography is artistry of a sort and artistry has no bounds. ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top