Macro (??)

[architkataria]

Is this macro? (That's an honest question!)
I used my Tamron 70-300mm 4-5.6f lens. This is at 300mm, 5.6f, ISO-200, 1/50secs.

Honestly, given my experience, I am very happy with the result. "Had to" share it with you! Thanks for watching.



Cheers!

The first time ever, I tried to correct a picture's colors/contrast etc. I'm amazed by how much difference PP can cause. Here's a link to the unprocessed picture:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3919294...48247/sizes/l/
The one above has been color corrected.

[raveen2u]

Superb shot it is. you made the perfect focus...
Raveen

[martha36]

Beautiful! I'd call it a macro shot.

[dmpete]

By definition: macro is to make appear as actual size. This has been extended to include microscopic as well. This is fairly pragmatic and the definition has be derived from my research on the subject as well as observation on the different Photography websites.

Oh, by the way. This is a great shot. Well done.

[daft_biker]

Originally Posted by architkataria

Is this macro? (That's an honest question!)

No but it's a nice picture Looks like you got some great eye detail and the background is fantastic...well done. I think it's some sort of monarch butterfly.

I hope you will forgive me for posting a picture but hopefully it shows how a big subject like this looks when you shoot it in macro:

I think I shot that at 1:1 so that's only just macro too!

1:1 or lifesize is where macro begins, your 70-300mm probably does half-lifesize at it's closest focus distance. Half-lifesize is good for a zoom but most dedicated macro lenses let you get even closer....if you want to go closer that is!

[architkataria]

Originally Posted by raveen2u

Superb shot it is. you made the perfect focus...
Raveen

Originally Posted by martha36

Beautiful! I'd call it a macro shot.

Originally Posted by dmpete

By definition: macro is to make appear as actual size. This has been extended to include microscopic as well. This is fairly pragmatic and the definition has be derived from my research on the subject as well as observation on the different Photography websites.

Oh, by the way. This is a great shot. Well done.

Thank you so much everyone. Your comments on DPS always encourage!

I probably have to post a question (on another forum) around how a macro lens is different. I'm sure my lens does not fall into that category. How does it help getting such shots?

[architkataria]

Originally Posted by daft_biker

No but it's a nice picture Looks like you got some great eye detail and the background is fantastic...well done. I think it's some sort of monarch butterfly.

I hope you will forgive me for posting a picture but hopefully it shows how a big subject like this looks when you shoot it in macro:
[IMG][/IMG]
I think I shot that at 1:1 so that's only just macro too!

1:1 or lifesize is where macro begins, your 70-300mm probably does half-lifesize at it's closest focus distance. Half-lifesize is good for a zoom but most dedicated macro lenses let you get even closer....if you want to go closer that is!

Thanks for the explanation and for your compliment

Hmm.. I'll be a bit lazy and rather than searching the web, ask here itself: I understand that macro (technically) would be closer. When you say 1:1, what ratio is this? As I understand, there cannot be a way to compare "real" size of the subject with its picture, as the picture can simply be enlarged. Sorry for asking while sharing!

[equilution]

In my opinion, macro just means a closeup shot that shows great detail. It doesn't necessarily need to be taken with a high-dollar macro/micro lens. If you can get those kind of results with your 300, then you are a macro photographer! Nice shot!

[daft_biker]

Originally Posted by architkataria

Thanks for the explanation and for your compliment

Hmm.. I'll be a bit lazy and rather than searching the web, ask here itself: I understand that macro (technically) would be closer. When you say 1:1, what ratio is this? As I understand, there cannot be a way to compare "real" size of the subject with its picture, as the picture can simply be enlarged. Sorry for asking while sharing!

1:1 means 1mm of subject will take up 1mm of the sensor.

If I was to tell you that the width of the image I posted was 22mm you would be able to work out how big the eye was no matter how much I enlarge it onscreen. I regularly use the magnifiation to work out the size of subjects I've photographed as it can be very useful in helping with identification.

It's probably easiest to think of an image on a slide - if you shot an image at 1:1 using slide film then the subject would be the same size on the slide as it was in real life. At higher magnifications the subject would be even bigger on the slide than it was in real life.

The word macro on it's own is pretty meaningless as unless you give the magnification it tells us nothing and if you tell us the magnification there's nothing gained in calling it a macro. These days most folk seem to call shots macro because they think it's cool or something....certainly the marketing men seem to like slapping macro stickers on products that aren't macro lenses

If you see the word macro in a thread title you can be pretty certain that the image(s) contained in the thread will not be true macros!

[FoG]

Technically Macro is bandied about in photogrpahy now as P&S have the flower "macro" setting t however this is often more a close up like your shot it allows the camera to focus closer in but as someone else says Macro actual is much much closer and more detailed than any normal Zoom or standard lens canmangae which is why they cost more as they are optimised to Zoom into more detail .... so think of this aas a close-up and the Marcro setting as a close focus rather than Macro (this was used to sell P&S cameras more) ...

Euither way it is an excellent shot and has great detail so well done ! now go get a Macro lens and hagve fun !!