Mite versus Spider

[GardenersHelper]

These were captured hand-held at a local nature reserve last week using my FZ330 bridge camera with two stacked Raynox 150 close-up lenses and KX800 twin flash. The raw files were batch processed in DXO Optics Pro and Silkypix, with image-specific adjustments in Lightroom. There are 1300 pixel high versions of these images in this album at Flickr.

I came across a spider's web that had caught quite a lot of small prey.
#1

1172 05 2017_05_18 P1240836_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

While I photographed one of the prey that was struggling to get free (and did in fact manage to free itself) I noticed another of the prey that looked unusual, being very red, seen here at the bottom left, out of focus.
#2

1172 06 2017_05_18 P1240876_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

It turned out not to be prey. It was a predator, feasting on one of the spider's catches. I think it may have been a Red Velvet mite.
#3

1172 07 2017_05_18 P1240881_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

And then the spider turned up .......
#4

1172 08 2017_05_18 P1240900_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

........ and moved in closer.
#5

1172 09 2017_05_18 P1240904_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

I don't know if there was any direct contact between the two predators, or some sort of non-contact communication/threat, but the mite backed off .........
#6

1172 10 2017_05_18 P1240919_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

........ and wandered off.
#7

1172 11 2017_05_18 P1240933_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

I found it odd that where previously the mite's body seemed to be smoothly rounded (#3, #4), it had become pitted with indentations.
#8

1172 13 2017_05_18 P1240939_DxO 0100RAW01cP SP7 LR6 1300h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

I think in #5 you can see one of these pits starting to develop. I have another image (that I didn't put into the album but perhaps I should have) which shows that pit having grown larger.

I suppose the smooth rounded look might be an optical illusion in #3 and #4, but seeing that pit grow makes me think it is real. Perhaps they are breathing holes opening and closing.

 

[hoftwi]

Great capture and excellent story Nick I have no idea how you mange to stack 2 Raynox 150 hand-held, my hands tremble too much

 

[Graham]

Wonderful images Nick and what you do with the Raynox lens is beyond me.

 

[alfbranch]

Great stuff Nick
I suspect when the spider is bigger the velvet mite will possibly be a meal if it is not quick enough.

 

[GardenersHelper]

Great capture and excellent story Nick

Thanks Icy.

I have no idea how you mange to stack 2 Raynox 150 hand-held, my hands tremble too much

My hands shake a lot too. I think it works because I use autofocus and with my setup the autofocus works pretty fast. I use a very small focus box and all I have to do is get the camera a suitable distance away from the subject (because close-up lenses only focus within a certain range of distance from the subject) and put the focus box where I want the centre of focus to be and then press the shutter button. I don't have to look closely to see if the subject is in focus, taking the time to rock back and forth to get it in focus (and focused where I want the centre of focus to fall). Just putting the focus box where I want it is much easier on my eyes, and fast.

It is different with macro lenses. I've used the Canon 100L macro and Sigma 105 macro with my Canon 70D, and an Olympus 60mm macro with my G6 and G80. Especially as the magnification goes up I've found their autofocusing too slow to be useful - lots of "hunting", and sometimes not focusing at all after all the hunting.

I get hardly any hunting when I'm using zoom lenses with close-up lenses. Most of the time either it focuses almost straight away or it beeps, telling me it can't find focus. That means I'm the wrong distance from the subject so I move the camera towards or away from the subject until I see it coming into focus then try again.

 

[hoftwi]

Thanks Icy.



My hands shake a lot too. I think it works because I use autofocus and with my setup the autofocus works pretty fast. I use a very small focus box and all I have to do is get the camera a suitable distance away from the subject (because close-up lenses only focus within a certain range of distance from the subject) and put the focus box where I want the centre of focus to be and then press the shutter button. I don't have to look closely to see if the subject is in focus, taking the time to rock back and forth to get it in focus (and focused where I want the centre of focus to fall). Just putting the focus box where I want it is much easier on my eyes, and fast.

It is different with macro lenses. I've used the Canon 100L macro and Sigma 105 macro with my Canon 70D, and an Olympus 60mm macro with my G6 and G80. Especially as the magnification goes up I've found their autofocusing too slow to be useful - lots of "hunting", and sometimes not focusing at all after all the hunting.

I get hardly any hunting when I'm using zoom lenses with close-up lenses. Most of the time either it focuses almost straight away or it beeps, telling me it can't find focus. That means I'm the wrong distance from the subject so I move the camera towards or away from the subject until I see it coming into focus then try again.

Thanks Nick, it is so informative May you please explain what is a focus box?

 

[GardenersHelper]

Wonderful images Nick

Thanks Graham.

and what you do with the Raynox lens is beyond me.

That seems to puzzle quite a lot of people. After all, it's obvious that if you use a general purpose non-pro zoom lens and then stick another piece of inexpensive glass in front of it there is no way you are going to get image quality that you could get with a lens that is specifically designed to handle small subjects and be super sharp.

The thing is, there is a qualification to this which isn't well known and is definitely counter-intuitive: If you use very small apertures like I do it doesn't matter much what optics you use. This is because the blurring effects of diffraction become dominant. This came as quite a surprise to me when I bought expensive macro equipment. I was expecting my image quality to improve substantially. It didn't. In fact, it didn't seem to improve at all. It took me a while to work out what was going on. I did various tests and comparisons and eventually managed to convince myself that it really didn't make any difference I could see. My struggle to understand what was going on is documented in a number of the posts in my Journey thread.

Eventually I found something that seemed to explain what was going on. It is a couple of bullet points from a long and highly technical article on equivalence which seems to be well regarded by some people who know a lot about this stuff (I don't understand most of the article). Here is what it says, and this seems to make sense of what I had discovered.

• All systems suffer the same diffraction softening at the same DOF, but do not necessarily resolve the same detail at the same DOF, as diffraction softening is merely one of many forms of blur (e.g. lens aberrations, motion blur, large pixels, etc.).
  
  
• As the DOF deepens, all systems asymptotically lose detail, and by f/32 on FF (f/22 on APS-C, f/16 on mFT -- 4/3), the differences in resolution between systems is trivial, regardless of the lens, sensor size, or pixel count.

So, being convinced about this, when I'm doing minimum aperture shooting I use the equipment that has the best usability for my way of working, as this increases the chance of a successful outcome. For my flashed-based single shot work with invertebrates this is my FZ330 with close-up lenses and KX800 flash. For botanical work it is different, because for that I use a whole range of apertures. In this case larger sensors can produce better results and for me that was my APS-C 70D for a couple of years, although I found that I still preferred the usability of a telephoto zoom, with and without close-up lenses rather than a prime macro lens, even if this did reduce the image quality a bit. Now I've switched to a micro four thirds G80, also with a telephoto zoom with and without close-up lenses.

The one thing I will use a macro lens for is stacking, for which it is best to use "sweet spot" apertures to maximise the captured detail. The G80 has excellent focus-bracketing, and my Olympus 60mm macro is super sharp. So that is what I will use for stacking. That is, I will if and when I do any. I've done some tests and proved to myself that it can produce what seem to me to be amazing results, but it turns out that I much prefer the flexibility and creative flow of single-shot working and since doing the stacking tests I haven't found any enthusiasm for doing more stacking despite the excellence of what it can produce.

 

[GardenersHelper]

Thanks Nick, it is so informative May you please explain what is a focus box?

On the left you can see a little box, that is the focus box. The camera will focus on what the focus box is pointing at.


Focus box 800h by gardenersassistant, on Flickr

The focus box can be moved anywhere on the screen apart from the very edge. It can be one of several sizes. I almost always use the smallest size.

Normally I have the focus box in the middle of the screen (you can use it on the LCD or the EVF - I almost always use the LCD, which is articulated. I can get at more awkward angles that way). I then point the camera so the focus box is pointing at where I want the centre of focus and half press the shutter button. With focus confirmed I move the camera to compose the shot and fully press the shutter button to take the shot ("Focus and recompose").

Sometimes it is better to move the focus box away from the centre. For example, if I am taking photos of a snail as it moves the desired centre of focus will typically be away from the centre. I move the focus box to where I want the centre of focus to be then I can keep taking photos of the snail as it moves without having to jump back and forth to focus and recompose, focus and recompose, focus and recompose. I can just shoot, shoot, shoot while tracking the motion of the subject.

 

[hoftwi]

Thank you so much again Nick for the detail explanation Definitely learn something new everyday. I need to find a way to improve my skill and I will have a go later with your suggestion.