Crane fly on ageing London Pride

GardenersHelper

GardenersHelper

In Memoriam
Messages
6,344
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
Captured in our garden hand-held with Raynox 150 close-up lens on FZ330 bridge camera and KX800 twin flash. Processed with DXO Optics Pro 11 and Silkypix 7 Developer Pro.

1

0974 01 2016_09_19 P1070301_DxO RAW 01a SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

2

0974 02 2016_09_19 P1070303_DxO RAW 01a SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

3

0974 03 2016_09_19 P1070299_DxO RAW 01a SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

4

0974 07 2016_09_19 P1070309_DxO RAW 01a SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

5

0974 08 2016_09_19 P1070311_DxO RAW 01a SP7 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr
 
Nick what exceptional detail. Number two is my pick and I like the background colour. :clap::clap::clap: The big crop looks like the aliens have landed :LOL:
 
Another super set, Nick...as the Crane Fly gets progressively bigger in each image, is this achieved by zooming in with the FZ330?, or is each shot a larger crop of the original image?
 
Really like the BG colours in these shots Nick, that really makes this cranefly stand out.
As said, with each shot they get closer. I would say individual shots as I know you take so many so no crops :)
 
holty said:
really good shots
we call them daddy long legs
Click to expand...

Thanks. Of course they aren't the only things called daddy long legs. So are harvestmen and apparently so are cellar spiders.

charlychuckchuck said:
Nick what exceptional detail. Number two is my pick and I like the background colour. :clap::clap::clap: The big crop looks like the aliens have landed :LOL:
Click to expand...

Thanks Charles. That's one of the things I like about invertebrates - they all look like aliens to me.

Paul Iddon said:
Lovely set Nick, well done.

Paul.
Click to expand...

Thanks Paul.

The Weasel said:
Another super set, Nick...as the Crane Fly gets progressively bigger in each image, is this achieved by zooming in with the FZ330?, or is each shot a larger crop of the original image?
Click to expand...

Thanks Andy. Graham got it exactly right. With the FZ330 having such a small sensor it can't take as much cropping as larger cameras. The first one used an effective focal length of around 75mm and the last one an effective focal length of 600mm.

Graham said:
Really like the BG colours in these shots Nick, that really makes this cranefly stand out.
As said, with each shot they get closer. I would say individual shots as I know you take so many so no crops :)
Click to expand...

Thanks Graham. Spot on about the numbers. I captured 33 shots from that one angle. It was the only angle I used. The crane fly was rather hemmed in so it might have been the only possible angle. It was certainly the only easy angle. :)

I ended up keeping 8, which is an untypically large proportion for me. I think that is because it was an easy subject (not moving, on foliage that wasn't moving, and plenty of time. I find that crane flies are very hard to upset and make fly away.

As you know I like to get sets with different magnifications, and that is the way I shoot, varying the magnifications. I do crop though, most often for composition but sometimes for DOF. In this case though the crops were tiny.

derbydude said:
A great set well impressed
Click to expand...

Thanks.
 
Thanks for the explanation, Nick...the only reason I asked re Zoom / Cropping was, if it was Zoom then I will definitely be thinking about buying a FZ330, would the zoom lens be sturdy enough to support my Ring Flash?, or would I need a flash something similar to yours?
 
The Weasel said:
Thanks for the explanation, Nick...the only reason I asked re Zoom / Cropping was, if it was Zoom then I will definitely be thinking about buying a FZ330, would the zoom lens be sturdy enough to support my Ring Flash?, or would I need a flash something similar to yours?
Click to expand...

It depends on how heavy the ring flash is. I would be doubtful about hanging anything heavier than a close-up lens on an extending lens. Personally I wouldn't do it. It might be ok, but I wouldn't want to take the risk.

Could I probe a little as to why you would be interested in an FZ330 and close-up lens? The 7D is, I understand, a terrific camera, and the 100mm macro is optically excellent. I believe they work well with achromats like the Raynox 150 and 250 (and you can stack the 150 and 250 to get more magnification, and use them in combination with extension tubes or teleconverters).

If you want zoom for close-up/macro you could put the Raynox on a 55-250 EF-S STM (as long as it is the STM version - I couldn't get autofocus to work with my Raynoxes on one of the earlier, non-STM variants). Although relatively inexpensive (about £150) the 55-250 EF-S STM is well regarded for sharpness (for a zoom lens). The minimum aperture is f/22 at 55mm going to f/32 at 250mm, which is nice for DOF for close-ups, if you like lots of DOF and use very small apertures like I do - most people don't though. The 55-250 works fine with the Raynox 150 and 250, with no vignetting so you get to use the whole range. The 55-250 STM is the lens that I keep on my 70D the whole time, mainly for flowers, for which my 70D is my go to camera. I use the 55-250 bare or with a mild Canon 500D close-up lens for flowers.

All that said, I'm not sure what you would gain from that compared to using your 100 mm macro, with and without close-up lenses.

It's true that I use a small sensor camera and close-up lenses by choice for close-up/macro of little animals. I have the 70D and a Sigma 105 macro, and I have tried the 100L macro and MPE-65, but I prefer the small sensor setup. (I have written loads about this in my journey thread). But why are you thinking about the FZ330 Andy? I wouldn't want you to think that there is something special about the FZ330 that can produce image quality that other setups can't. There isn't. If you like I will happily go into this in some more detail. There are obviously reasons why I prefer using my small sensor cameras for little animals, and prefer my 70D for flowers, but your needs, preferences, working methods, attitude towards post processing etc may be different from mine. Remember that most people here use kit more like yours than mine.
 
Hi Nick...I was of the thinking that the zoom on your FZ330 would give you a greater working distance?, because at the minute I spend more time scaring off the prospective subject by sticking the great big 7D + 100mm + Ring Flash in it's face, maybe I need to slow down my approach and practice some fly stalking :LOL:

I like the idea of the 55-250mm, so will give that some thought.

Thanks

Andy...(y)
 
The Weasel said:
Hi Nick...I was of the thinking that the zoom on your FZ330 would give you a greater working distance?, because at the minute I spend more time scaring off the prospective subject by sticking the great big 7D + 100mm + Ring Flash in it's face, maybe I need to slow down my approach and practice some fly stalking :LOL:

I like the idea of the 55-250mm, so will give that some thought.

Thanks

Andy...(y)
Click to expand...

What sort of working distances are you getting at the moment? The working distance with the Raynox 150 on the 55-250 on the 70D is between around 6 and 8 inches. It is the same on the FZ200/330. Magnification is mainly controlled by the zoom rather than by moving nearer or further from the subject or changing the focusing as with a close-up lens on a prime lens. As a result the working distance is largely independent of magnification.

On a given zoom lens, each close-up lens has a range of working distance that can be used. The size of the range decreases as the power of the close-up lens increases, and the working distance also decreases as the power increases. By the time you get to really powerful close-up lenses like the Raynox MSN-202 and 505 the working distance is very short (32mm for the 202 and 18.5mm for the 505) and the range is almost zero.
 
My working distance with the Raynox 150 on the 100mm is between 5 and 8 inches, so if I want a closer shot I have to physically move closer, that is why I like the idea of using a zoom, instead of moving closer and risking scaring off the critter, I could just zoom in for a closer image.

I own a 70 - 200mm f4 L IS and I might give that a try with the Raynox and see how it goes, but not sure if the minimum focus distance of 120cm might be an issue.
 
Last edited:
The Weasel said:
My working distance with the Raynox 150 on the 100mm is between 5 and 8 inches, so if I want a closer shot I have to physically move closer, that is why I like the idea of using a zoom, instead of moving closer and risking scaring off the critter, I could just zoom in for a closer image.

I own a 70 - 200mm f4 L IS and I might give that a try with the Raynox and see how it goes, but not sure if the minimum focus distance of 120cm might be an issue.
Click to expand...

Definitely worth a try. The filter thread is 67mm so the Raynox clip on adapter should fit. I think it is the close-up lens that (mainly) determines what the working distance is. My guess is that you will find it is about 6 to 8 inches, like with my 55-250.

The minimum focus distance shouldn't be a problem as close-up lenses are I think designed to be used with infinity focus. At least, that is the way Raynox quote the working distance, for example on this page.

I don't know if you have tried autofocus with the 100L. I found it too slow, and hunted too much to be useful. You might find that autofocus is much faster and doesn't hunt with the 150 on the 70-200. The camera/lens doesn't know it is working at macro distances and unlike with a macro lens it doesn't have to try focusing really close - you can use infinity focus remember - and it is with the very close focusing where the hunting arises with macro lenses.

As to zooming and working distance, I think you will find the working distance is much the same as with the 150 on the 100L. You can tell what the minimum working distance is by using autofocus. Move in closer until autofocus won't work any more. That is as close as you can go. If you are using manual focus and try to go in closer than that in order to get more magnification you will not get a sharp image. In order to get more magnification you need to use a stronger close-up lens and/or use extension tubes, a teleconverter or bellows. All of these except a teleconverter will have a shorter working distance.

A teleconverter lets you get the same magnification from further away, so that is something you might want to explore. You can't use teleconverters with EF-S lenses like the 55-250, so I don't know what happens to working distance when using the 150 on a zoom lens and add a teleconverter. But the 70-200 and 100 are EF lenses so a teleconverter is a possibility for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top