Need tips on focusing

[Mojorisen]

Originally Posted by Stryker

I love taking close up photos of flowers and to a lesser extent, insects. Since my 18-135 Nikkor wasn't helping me too much in this regard, I bought a new Tamron 90mm Macro for my Nikon D40. Unfortunately, this lens doesn't autofocus with my camera and I am having big trouble judging the focus manually. I invariably get it slightly out of focus and end up getting fuzzy shots.

I am now using the method of taking three or four or more photos of the same subject and keeping the best out of them, but almost impossible to do when shooting insects.

For example, take a look at this one of an ant:



Is there anything I am doing wrong? I checked the diopter adjustment and it seems OK. I have also seen posts here and elsewhere stating that a tripod is nearly useless when photographing insects and I don't use one myself. I guess I will get the hang of it as I use the lens more, but if there is anything obvious that I am missing, please advise me.

My second question is about how to get more of the view in focus. Using f/stops of 12 or higher doesn't seem to work, especially in natural light. I have seen most macro photos of flowers have almost all the flower in sharp focus, whereas most of mine tend to turn out like this:



OK, this flower was only 5 to 7 mm across but I would still like to have more of it in focus than is seen in the photo above. Any suggestions would be welcome.

This may be a simplistic answer to your "focus" question and someone may have touched on it already, but, did you try the "dial" on the view finder? Sometimes it gets moved then things look in or out of focus and this can give you a false sense of focus when using the camera manually. Also, on my camera (not a Nikon) when in manual focus mode my camera will beep when it senses it's in focus even though it's not in AF mode. Not sure if your Nikon has that same feature but it helps me since I wear glasses and never know when my vision is in focus itself.

[Stryker]

Hmmm, now that you mention it my Nikon does give a beep even in MF. I was wondering why it does that. I will see if I can get it to beep when I take these macros next time, before clicking.

I wear glasses too, pretty strong ones as well, but I played with the diopter adjustment next to the view finder and I have now set it to where what I see in the viewfinder is more or less what comes out in the photograph.

[clockdoc]

Another trick to try is to insert a high contrast target like a playing card into the scene at the 'plane' where you want to focus (manually or in autofocus). Many digital cameras look for a line of contrast on which to focus in the 'auto' mode and the card may help. Granted, the use of a card is more tedious when doing insects in the garden but may be helpful when doing a studio-type setup shot.

[Johnsohk]

I found an excellent guide....http://fotosharp.com/depth_of_field_info.html

It all makes a lot of sense.
John

[Stryker]

Ah, I'd like to think I'm improving my focusing technique. Here's my latest attempt:



I especially liked the way the water glistens in the middle, I put a drop of water into the flower just to see how it will appear. Came out OK, I guess.

EXIF:
Aperture: f/5.6
Speed: 0.005 (1/200) sec
ISO: 1600

Edited in PSE6 to resize and cleanup. The ISO jumped to 1600 because this was indoors and there wasn't any bright light around I could shine on the flower. I tried at lower ISO setting sbut they all came out darker than I wanted.

The full flower:



What do you guys think?

[daft_biker]

2nd one looks cracking If it was the centre of the flower you were aiming for in the first then it looks bang on to me. Did you try ones where you focus on the tips of the stamen too? (just for the sake of practicing!)

[Stryker]

Thanks daft_biker. As for the first one, yes I was aiming for the centre of the flower. I have two more photos on Flickr in which I focused on the tips of the stamen, only I was trying it sideways so that I could focus on the nearer ones and then the middle ones.

It was really cloudy outside and raining as well, so this whole exercise was conducted indoors, which meant lesser light since I don't have any fancy light box stuff. This in turn meant wider apertures and higher ISOs, even after placing the flower next to the window.

[daft_biker]

ISO looked fine to me....as practice shots they are rather pretty so good job there too. If anything shooting at a wide aperture would mean you had to be really accurate with the focus so I don't think that's a problem either. You've got it dialed

[rerem]

Originally Posted by janef

Hi

I had the same problem as you are. With the macro lens - mine's 100mm - some of the flower would be out of focus, and it was really starting to annoy me. It wasn't until I was chatting to someone who suggested using my standard lens, in this case a Canon EF 17-40mm zoom to take the shot. What a difference, as it enabled me to take the same shot but with the whole bloom in focus, without losing any of the detail. It does mean though getting quite close, but that's no big deal. In these instances I do use a tripod, and a remote shutter - as I'm still trying not to wobble the camera

I've attached a shot I've done using this lens just to show you what I'm talking about.

I'm no expert, but i'm sure someone will explain in my case why this works!

This is sort of borderline close-focus and macro. To me, Macro is getting close and letting the DOF "problem" become a sort of magical abstraction. Shooting flower macros 30 years ago taught me a lot about photography. There's no rush,you explore color and texture and form,you find the right light. I generally set my focus close and then kind of lean in or back to get it the way I want.

A flower that's very 3D,like a rose or Iris defies any effort to get ultra close and still focus everything. However....you CAN do an ultra close that has a whole range of sharp and soft and make that work. A shot like this rose is not something you do from 4" away. If you want a rose in full focus you are best odd with a 35 mm wide angle on a small extension at about f 11. A flower that's more 2 dimensional, like a daisy or my favorite, Cinereria, is easier as you can find the angle to get it all into your DOF.

Bugs + bees won't play along with getting too close. I've done macro's with my 300 mm on a bellows. That can get a real up close from more distance---but a long tele won't have much DOF at all,and when you have it on a bellows,it's a bulky beast hard to maneuver on a tripod,but then you are using f 8 to get some DOF and full bellows adds a couple of stops to that.....so it's not a thing you try with a low ASA.

Truth is....I'm really mostly still an old school 35 mm guy. Digital is handy,quick. I WANT a nice Pentax digital SLR,once I can afford it. However....for a great macro,I'd rather use a vintage 70's screw mount match needle 35 mm SLR because I have that hardware and I know what I'm getting.

[rerem]

Originally Posted by Stryker

Ah, I'd like to think I'm improving my focusing technique. Here's my latest attempt:



I especially liked the way the water glistens in the middle, I put a drop of water into the flower just to see how it will appear. Came out OK, I guess.

EXIF:
Aperture: f/5.6
Speed: 0.005 (1/200) sec
ISO: 1600
.................................................. ................rerem.............
This is quite nice. A Cosmos is rather 2D so at the right angle you can get the plane for DOF. However, I'm fond of the texture,translucence that's possible outdoors. As a illustrative shot, this is fine. However,outdoors in the light of early morning or late afternoon,with a shot from an angle where not everything is sharp...there's where you can find soul.

I have intentionally wetted a flower. Natural morning dew and morning light,however is where you find the gem shot. You want to know about using the plane that puts a lot of the subject in full focus,but I believe that the transition to out of focus adds the depth while lighting adds texture and soul.

Keep in mind too,that a lot of the power of macro photography is that the camera acts as an intermediary,so you can see a reality in a large print that your eye never sees.

I used to like doing projects with Focal 400 slide film. Quite grainy but a bit warm toned and just amazing if you had real dramatic light. It kind of rendered like French Impressionist painting,not so accurate but a lot of soul. It's ironic that "better technology" has taken away that option.

Edited in PSE6 to resize and cleanup. The ISO jumped to 1600 because this was indoors and there wasn't any bright light around I could shine on the flower. I tried at lower ISO setting sbut they all came out darker than I wanted.
..............................................
The full flower:



What do you guys think?

It's a good shot. With Macro,there's possibilities beyond the basic What You See Is What You Get. There's a whole realm of abstractions that actually are a result of minimal depth of field.