First images with Laowa 100mm 2X macro

GardenersHelper

GardenersHelper

In Memoriam
Messages
6,344
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
These are from an initial hand-held test session in our garden with a Laowa 100mm 2X macro on a 2X Kenko teleconverter on a Sigma MC-11 EF to FE adapter on a Sony A7ii. The story behind these images is written up in this post in my Journey thread.

For the invertebrate images in this post the raw files were processed in DXO PhotoLab, Silkypix, Lightroom and Topaz DeNoise AI. For the flower images in the next post the raw files were processed in PhotLab, Lightroom and DeNoise AI, The first was also adjusted in Silkypix and the second in Photoshop.

There are 1300 pixel high versions of these and other images from the test session in this album at Flickr.

#1

1652 01 2020_06_16 DSC03779_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIc (1) by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#2

1652 07 2020_06_16 DSC03794_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#3

1652 12 2020_06_16 DSC03799_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#4 The flies were quite small, perhaps as small as 3.5mm long for #5 and #6.

1652 22 2020_06_16 DSC03830_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#5

1652 26 2020_06_16 DSC03843_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#6

1652 34 2020_06_16 DSC03882_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#7

1652 36 2020_06_16 DSC03920_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#8

1652 43 2020_06_16 DSC04101_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-2-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
This A7ii setup lacks the functionality and flexibility I like to use for flowers with my micro four thirds setups, but I wanted to see how well or otherwise it might work for occasional flower photos during invertebrates sessions.

#9

1652 44 2020_06_16 DSC04001_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAIcc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#10

1652 45 2020_06_16 DSC04005_PLab3-Edit LR 1300h-DNAIcc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#11

1652 46 2020_06_16 DSC04006_PLab3 SP9 LR 1300h-DNAI by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#12

1652 47 2020_06_16 DSC04012_PLab3 LR 1300h-DNAIcc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#13

1652 48 2020_06_16 DSC04025_PLab3 LR 1300h-DNAIcc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#14

1652 49 2020_06_16 DSC04035_PLab3 LR 1300h-DNAIc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#15

1652 50 2020_06_16 DSC04047_PLab3 LR 1300h-DNAIcc by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

#16

1652 51 2020_06_16 DSC04075_PLab3 LR 1300h-DNAI by gardenersassistant, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Amazing stuff Nick
Some great bee and wasp shots there
 
Paul Iddon said:
They're terrific George - especially the insects. The Venus is a most impressive lens, especially given the cost...

Paul
Click to expand...

Thanks Paul.

I'm certainly liking the lens so far, and it seems to have a good reputation. However, I'm not sure how much these insect shots can tell us about the optical qualities of the lens. They are very deep into diffraction territory. The one with the largest aperture (#6) was f/20. I can't be sure what the magnification was, but that is a rather small fly and it wasn't cropped hugely so I suspect I was at around 3:1, which would make it something like f/80 effective. The rest were at f/32 and f/45 and I'm sure some of them, and even possibly most of them, were over f/100 effective. These are detail-killing apertures, so the fine detail that I'm sure the lens will capture at normal apertures is being crushed out of existence.

I think one would need to use the lens in a more normal way to get a handle on how well it can perform. I'm just using it in a pretty crude way (adding in a 2X teleconverter just makes it worse) because I'm after the depth of field and I'm keeping the outputs small. Despite my best efforts with processing, I think some of them have absolutely nothing more to give; #5 for example is on the edge of falling part at 1300 pixels high. Look any closer and it quickly gets nasty. In fact I'm rather nervous about the look of it even at 1300 pixels high.

I don't want to be unduly negative. After all, I think that these are the best I have managed with the small flies, by quite a long way actually. But we need to be realistic. In large measure that is a reflection on the poor results I have been limited to previously with small subjects. I really don't want to mislead anyone with what I'm up to with this approach. And I don't want to mislead about this particular lens. I got results that looked similar to me in my other two recent threads (here and here) using the same ultra-small aperture approach, and they used the Laowa 25 and Sigma 105. The benefit for me of the Laowa 100 is simply that it will let me use a single setup to cover the range of scene sizes I'm most interested in for invertebrates.
 
Last edited:
Paul Iddon said:
I never take mine beyond f/11 on my 70D -
Click to expand...

Yes, you are using yours in a more normal way. That said, f/11 at 2:1 with the 1.6X Canon crop factor would still take you to f/53 effective full frame equivalent, so you would be getting non-trivial diffraction, just not as much as I'm getting with even smaller effective apertures.

Paul Iddon said:
and using extension tubes would likely add some diffraction.
Click to expand...

Yes, the extra diffraction would come from the extra magnification. On top of that since I was using a teleconverter rather than extension tubes there will also have been blurring from the 2X optics.

PS, it's nice using the 100mm 2X, which is the only chipped version, so I get to focus wide open, and it's sharp enough for focus peaking to work too some of the time. It worked for the smallest subjects and that was hugely beneficial, making the focusing much easier on my eyes and probably more accurate too.
 
Last edited:
footman said:
Superb images, I like your processing, especially on the flowers.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

footman said:
Could you elaborate on how the A7II lacks the flexibility of the m4/3 kit?
Click to expand...

Several things come to mind: Aperture bracketing; Video stacking; Portrait orientation; Customisation; Joystick; Weight.

I'll refer to my current preferred kit for flowers etc, a Panasonic G9 with an Olympus 60mm macro lens. No flash, because I use natural light for flowers etc.

Aperture bracketing

In my flower images I like where possible to have a pleasing (to my eye) balance between the extent to which the subject is in focus and rendition of the background. One of the factors in this is aperture. I could chimp captured images to see how they look and then try again with a different aperture if I thought I might get a better balance. But this is time-consuming and disrupts the flow of a session, and in any case trying to sort out what is best on the fly, on a tiny screen which I may not be able to see very well because of bright ambient light has the potential to be both frustrating and error-prone. So I use aperture bracketing to capture a series of images from f/2.8 to f/22 with a single press of the shutter button. I have the G9 set up so that it looks after the ISO and shutter speed - it uses base ISO until the shutter speed drops to 1/80 sec, at which point it starts raising the ISO. If it reaches ISO 3200 it then starts slowing the shutter speed. I end up with sequences of images like the one below. I can then look at the images at a decent size, taking as long as I want over it, and choose which if any of them I want to use. (I generally capture several such sequences for each framing of each subject. This increases the chance of a usable result where the look I like was captured with a slow shutter speed. Where the scene illumination is varying, for example with sunlight coming through moving foliage, the repeated shots let me choose between play of light effects for a particular framing.

1529 4 1521 43 Aperture bracket sequence, F2point8 to F22 by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

The A7ii does not provide aperture bracketing.

Video stacking

Depending on my mood, on the ambient conditions especially the amount of breeze, and on the scene and subject, I may use aperture bracketing, or video stacking, or, most often, both, and decide during post processing which technique's result I like best.

For video stacking I capture what Panasonic terms "Post focus" videos. These are promoted as a way of deciding where you want the focus to fall after you have captured a scene. The camera captures a video as it pans from the nearest thing it can find to focus on to the furthest. It then shows you a few JPEGs extracted from the video and lets you choose which one(s) you want to keep. I don't use it like that though. I use the video, which in the case of the G9 is a 6K video, using almost the full pixel dimensions of the G9's 20 megapixel sensor. I use Helicon Focus to extract JPEGs from the video and stack them after I have chosen which of the extracted JPEGs to use.

This approach is easier and quicker than using focus bracketing. The capture is "point and shoot". Unlike with focus bracketing you don't have to make any decisions about how many images to capture and what spacing to have between them, and you don't have to arrange the focus so the sequence will start in the right place. The capture is relatively fast too, being done at 30 frames per second, as against 4.5 captures per second for stills. The speed of capture makes the technique more suitable for use hand-held (which is how I always work these days) and in breezy conditions (which are frequent where I live), and the short duration of each capture sequence makes it easier to do multiple captures (some work for stacking, some don't, so some repetition is good) while still moving quite fast from one subject to the next without feeling bogged down by a tedious capture procedure.

When working with video you are essentially using JPEG rather than raw, but the G9 provides a very flat "Cinelike D" profile which helps with dynamic range and highlights.

Video has an advantage in file handling and management as there is only one file per capture rather than many.

These are the sort of images I produce with video stacking.


1462 19 1457 05 2019_03_11 P1015812 G9+60 HHPFS32f F2.8 1-500 ISO400 EV-1 A29,2+innerC1 LR 1300h-sharpen by gardenersassistant, on Flickr


1457 12 2019_03_11 P1015867 G9+60 HHPFS34f F2.8 1-2000 ISO100 EV-1.7 C1 LR 1300h-sharpen by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

1462 23 1459 08 2019_02_17 P1014688 G9+60 HHPFS20f F2.8 1-3200 ISO400 EV-1.3 C1 LR 1300h-sharpen by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

The A7ii does not provide focus-racked videos.

Portrait orientation; Customisation; Joystick; Weight.

I use portrait orientation a lot for flowers. The A7ii's tilting screen is not as good for working in portrait orientation as the G9's fully articulated screen. (I almost always use screen rather than viewfinder btw.)

The G9 is highly customisable. For example it has two very conveniently placed buttons on the front of the camera and I use one of these to initiate setting of the camera white balance using the grey panel of a ColorChecker Passport (I do this for each scene). The customisability of the auto ISO implementation I described above is another example.

I use autofocus a lot for stills, using a single small focus area. The G9's joystick makes it easy to move the focus area around, should I not want to use focus and compose (I sometimes prefer one method, sometimes the other.)

The A7ii itself is quite light, but the lenses I have for it that I could use for flowers are quite heavy. In contrast the G9 is heavier, but the Olympus 60mm macro is very small and light. Overall I find the G9 with 60mm macro very usable for individual captures (for example sometimes one-handed to reach into awkward positions), and usable for long sessions without feeling any strain in my hands or wrists. (The G9's excellent grip helps with this.)
 
Last edited:
Superb set of images Nick.

Is there much added magnification with tubes?

A lens I was seriously looking at as for canon it has auto aperture control so none of this focus light hassle of making sure its bright enough to see subject and not too bright to affect image.
 
Tintin124 said:
Superb set of images Nick.
Click to expand...

Thanks Bryn.

Tintin124 said:
Is there much added magnification with tubes?
Click to expand...

With 68mm extension (36+20+12, a normal full set?) you get from 0.7X magnification at 150mm working distance to 3.1X at 65mm.


1658 1 Scene widths ext tubes vs 2X TC Laowa 100 A7ii by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

Tintin124 said:
A lens I was seriously looking at as for canon it has auto aperture control so none of this focus light hassle of making sure its bright enough to see subject and not too bright to affect image.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed, that is why I got the Canon version rather than the Sony version. Being EF, and having adapters, I can use it on the A7ii, 70D and my micro four thirds cameras. That said it didn't connect reliably on my G9, quite possibly because of the cheap Commlite EF to mFT adapter I'm using. I'm using Sigma's MC11 for the Sony and that is working fine with the Laowa 100 and 25 2.5X-5X, but that doesn't connect the MPE-65 to the A7ii reliably. This whole adapter thing seems very hit and miss.
 
GardenersHelper said:
Yes indeed, that is why I got the Canon version rather than the Sony version. Being EF, and having adapters, I can use it on the A7ii, 70D and my micro four thirds cameras. That said it didn't connect reliably on my G9, quite possibly because of the cheap Commlite EF to mFT adapter I'm using. I'm using Sigma's MC11 for the Sony and that is working fine with the Laowa 100 and 25 2.5X-5X, but that doesn't connect the MPE-65 to the A7ii reliably. This whole adapter thing seems very hit and miss.
Click to expand...

The only thing with the Canon one is the 9 blades over think 13 aperture blades for the others (assume they give a rounder bokeh)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top