For swag72, lack of DOF

[jgs001]

Sara, You asked in the barbwire (I think) thread about DOF at 250mm with the Raynox...

C&C not required, I know it's rubbish... I got the angles wrong... Can you guess what I was trying to shoot it for ?

 

[Toothie]

thats some small DoF

 

[jgs001]

 

[swag72]

Thanks John!!! Ohh, I got really excited seeing myself in a thread!! Well, that DoF is absolutely non existent!! I think it's best to concentrate on about 50mm?!!

Seriously though John. Thanks for taking the time

 

[jgs001]

Sara, you're more than welcome. I say go for it, the full wack see what you get. It's damnably difficult but get it right... It's a great feeling. I'd love to know what sort of reproduction ratio I'm getting. I saw all that math in another thread, but to be honest, I can't be bothered working it all out. Suffice to say that the above is sparkly bits stuck onto the fanned bits of a small pine cone, and is looking along one fanned out section.

 

[swag72]

I've only got the nifty and 100mm macro now that will fit the Raynox. My other lens's are too big for the adaptor Cheers though, must get out!!

 

[daft_biker]

I'd love to know what sort of reproduction ratio I'm getting.

Photograph a ruler like this:

Divide 22.2 by the number of milimetres that show on the width of the ruler pic.

For example in my pic I reckon there's about 3.5mm across the frame so 22.2/3.5=6.3. The magnification is 6.3x (or 6.3:1 if you prefer). I used a steel rule with half millimetre markings but at lower magnifications millimetres should be plenty accurate enough.

NB - the 22.2 relates to the width of the sensor in a 450D. It's not the same for all camera!

 

[jgs001]

Thanks for the guide. I just checked it and I get 8.5mm showing at min focus distance and 250mm which is 2.6x