Posts Tagged insect
July 21, 2010 – Bee and Daisy
Posted by Dave in Animals, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on July 21, 2010
Bee and Daisy
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1611
So I always seem to gravitate towards posting some kind of macro shot, either of a bug or a flower (or, well, both..) on Fridays. Not exactly sure why I feel that way (that’s a total lie, I know exactly why, I just don’t feel like sharing), but it’s the truth. And, I know, this isn’t Friday, it’s Wednesday. But it might as well be Friday, because I’ll be out of town the next couple days, and thus I won’t be posting anything. Which means that you get to look at this little guy for the rest of the weekend.
This is the first picture I’ve posted (and among the first I took) with my new (to me) Tamron 90mm macro. So far, I’d say I’m reasonably happy with it. I had some decent results, but I also had some that were less than stellar. I’m not going to blame the lens for those just yet though, and to be fair I’ve only taken the lens out on a couple walks around the neighborhood, and it’s definitely shown some promise. Hopefully you’ll all get to see some more pics from it in the coming weeks and months and years (I know, bold statement, given that I’ve only been doing this blog for just over a year now.)
Have a great weekend!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens. 1/250s, f/10.0, ISO 200. Focal length: 90mm (duh!).
Subscribe to the Picture of the Day via: Popularity: 9%
July 9, 2010 – Crazy Bug
Posted by Dave in Animals, Macro, Picture of the Day on July 9, 2010
Insect
Friday, July 9, 2010
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1608
I realized earlier today that it’s been a little while since I’ve posted a crazy macro bug shot. So here you go. I’ve got a fair number of bug shots that I just haven’t for whatever reason put online anywhere yet, so I had to dig this one up in order to post it today. I took this one earlier this spring, when I went on a little field trip to one of the parks here in Seattle (Carkeek Park, for those that know the area), because I was sick of the lack of bugs in my neighborhood. (Crazy, right? That I’d be complaining about there *not being enough* bugs. Weird.) I was using my recently-acquired macro ring flash, and two extension tubes with my Canon 50mm prime. (I don’t know the exact lengths of the extension tubes, but it was the two longer tubes out of the set of 3. With the third one on there, the already tiny working distance was just too short to be of any use..)
It’s really not very hard to get cool bug shots if you’ve got the equipment (and the equipment is surprisingly affordable!), but it does require a lot of patience. Both looking for bugs to take pictures of, as well as not getting too frustrated when they inevitably fly away before you get set up. Also, getting the bugs in focus is a real pain in the ass.
Another issue that I had with this particular set up is what I just hinted at: the small working distance. In order to focus, the bugs are only an inch or two from the front of your lens. So depending on how skittish the bug is, it can be hard to get close enough without them flying away. Also, they move a lot (especially the crawling bugs), so it can be extremely frustrating. But, it’s fun, so it’s worth the perseverance. (Wow, spell check told me I spelled that last word wrong, and after correcting it, it’s totally spelled differently than I would have expected.) Ideally, it would be nice to have a macro set up that would get me a similar level of magnification (or even more!) with a longer working distance. That’s where 100mm and 180mm macro lenses come in to play. Also, my macro flash isn’t adjustable at all, it just fires at full strength every time. Which means that sometimes there’s just no way to NOT overexpose the picture, because I’m already at the smallest aperture my lens will go to, at the lowest ISO my camera will do. I suppose the options would be to either use a different lens (that can go smaller), to manually cover some of the flash, or to use a neutral density filter. Perhaps I’ll try those later.
Anyway, have a great weekend everyone!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens with Opteka macro extension tubes. 1/160s, f/20.0, ISO 100.
Popularity: 13%
June 11, 2010 – That’s Not Pollen
Posted by Dave in Animals, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on June 11, 2010
Tiny Red Spiders
Friday, June 11, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1558
When I decided that it would be worth my while to crouch on my knees all the way down there on the ground to take this picture, I thought I was looking at a tiny white flower with little bits of red pollen on it. It wasn’t until I actually looked through the lens that I realized that the little red bits of pollen were MOVING. That was pretty creepy. Then, it wasn’t until even later than that, when I was looking at the images on the big screen back at home, that I realized that those aren’t little red insects, they’re actually little red SPIDERS. I mean, wow, that’s straight up freaky right there.
Just thought I’d share…
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens with Opteka macro extension tubes. 1/160s, f/18.0, ISO 100.
Popularity: 34%
May 19, 2010 – Fly
Posted by Dave in Animals, Macro, Picture of the Day on May 19, 2010
Fly
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1542
And there it is.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Canon 50mm f/1.8 with Opteka macro expansion tubes and Phoenix ring flash. 1/160s, f/18.0, ISO 100.
Popularity: 34%
April 27, 2010 – Bee and Lavender
Posted by Dave in Animals, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on April 27, 2010
Bee and Lavender
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1543
As promised, here’s a picture taken using my new macro tools that came in on Friday and Saturday. (To refresh your memory, I got a set of macro extension tubes, and a cheap macro flash.) I spent a little bit of time playing around with them over the weekend, and so far I’m pretty happy with the results. I’ve been using the setup almost exclusively with my 50mm prime lens so far, and it’s been working out fine.
It doesn’t seem like you can get in as close with this particular setup as you can with the reverse mounted lens, although that was sort of expected. (Although I wasn’t sure how dramatic of a difference it would be.) This picture was taken using 2 of the 3 tubes, so I could have added the third to get in closer, but it’s pretty unwieldy as-is with the flash attachment and everything on there, so getting close enough to the subject would be pretty challenging. (The tip of my lens was about an inch away from the bee as it was.) I need to try it out on different lenses though, to see how it reacts with each. (The longer your lens – not focal length, actual length – the less dramatic the effect. Makes sense, really, since if you’re 3 inches out from your sensor to start with, adding another 3 inches means you’re doubling it. If you start 12 inches out, adding 3 more is less than 30% of an increase..)
The flash is pretty awesome though. It of course takes a little bit of time to refresh, so my old strategy of just taking oodles and oodles of frames as I slowly swayed back and forth (to try to ensure that I got at least one in focus) needed to be adjusted somewhat. But, the benefit of being able to use a super-tiny aperture (f/18, even at ISO 100!) outweighed that. After shooting with the reverse-mount for awhile, having the extra depth of field is reeeeeally nice, and it has the added benefit of covering your butt if your focal point is a tiny bit off. It’s definitely a little bit unwieldy, especially when you mount it on a short lens. Having a longer lens (like a 100mm macro) that allows you a greater distance to your subject would be really handy for getting into corners and stuff. But, if you’re on a budget like me, this setup seems to be working out great so far. I’m sure this won’t be the last you’ll see of it. 
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens, with Opteka macro extension tubes. 1/160s, f/18.0, ISO 100. Phoenix macro ring flash.
Popularity: 29%
March 3, 2010 – Pollination
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day, Washington State on March 3, 2010
Insect and Flower
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=985
Whoa, not sure what happened there, I completely missed yesterday. I guess I was just.. kind of busy, so I sort of.. completely forgot to post a picture. Sorry about that! I’d say “I won’t let it happen again”, but obviously I will.
I realized today that it’s been almost a month and a half since I posted a picture of a bug. How could I let this happen?? Clearly, I had to remedy that situation immediately. I don’t really know what kind of bug this is (my first guess is always “bee”, but that’s based only on the fact that it’s standing on a flower, so clearly I’m not the authority), but it was willing to hang around for pictures, so it hardly matters.
As I’ve mentioned in the past, taking pictures of bugs like this is purely an exercise in patience. Obviously, they move. A LOT. Also, you’re dealing with microscopic depths of field, so if you tend to sway back and forth when you take pictures like I do, you might think you got the perfect shot only to find out later that you accidentally got the hindquarters of the bug in focus instead of it’s head. Depending on what macro method you’re using – as in, super-expensive-macro-lens, ordinary macro lens, macro kit (like this one), reverse-mounted lens, etc – you may get a larger or smaller depth of field, but it’ll always be super small. So, to counter both of those issues, you end up just needing to take a TON of shots, and hopefully a handful of them will turn out okay. (When I got this picture, for example, I took about 40 frames, and got 5 or 6 that were decent enough to hold on to.) So don’t get discouraged, just keep shooting, and be ready to dig through piles and piles of crappy ones to get what you want.
Notes: Camera: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 28-300 mm lens with Hoya Macro Kit. 1/200s, f/5.6, ISO 200. Focal length: 109mm.
Popularity: 48%
January 19, 2010 – Green Bottle Fly
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Macro, Picture of the Day on January 19, 2010
Green Bottle Fly
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1040
Alrighty, I finished up with that whole travelling to Montana thing. Now, back to real life. My original plan was to use something from that trip here, but honestly, I haven’t had a chance to even BEGIN going through them yet, so instead today I’ll fulfill one of last week’s requests. (If you want to request anything, either leave it in the comments or contact me directly – dave (at) davefry (dot) net. I’ll see if I’ve got anything that works.)
This is a green bottle fly (or at least that’s what my (really) brief research on google suggested), seen through a reverse-mounted 18-55 mm kit lens. I talked about this already at length in this post, so if you’re at all interested in this kind of stuff, please do yourself a favor and read that entry too. But, long story short, you buy a little adapter for your lens, and then the magic happens. Wooo!
I’ll try to at least do something resembling a first pass on the Montana pics tonight, at least as far as finding one worthy of posting here. We’ll see how that goes.
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, reverse-mounted 18-55mm kit lens. 1/320s, ISO 200.
Popularity: 17%
December 17, 2009 – Insect and Flower
Posted by Dave in Macro, Picture of the Day, Washington State on December 17, 2009
Insect and Flower
Thursday, December 17, 2009
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=986
See? A bug and a flower, just like I said. Man, I’m really good at predicting stuff. It’s almost like my today self somehow sent a message back through time to my yesterday self saying exactly which picture would be posted. Almost eerie, really.
Those of you who were with me earlier this year, you know that this summer I went on a mini-odyssey of sorts, exploring several different cheapskate methods of macro photography. The extreme case was of course the reverse-mount adapter that I used to get that picture of the fly a few days ago. That one, while extremely powerful, is also extremely difficult to use. Today’s solution, while it won’t get you nearly as close, is in a lot of ways more pleasant to use. It’s a Macro Kit, which consists of a set of these magnifying-lens type filters that you attach to the front of your lens. They magnify a bit and allow you to focus more closely than you would be able to otherwise. So they get you closer than you would be able to otherwise, but with a whole new set of limitations. (Your depth of field is very small as you would expect, although not as drastic as with the reverse-mount. Also, the area outside of the in-focus range gets blurry in a weird way. I guess I’d describe it by saying it gets “foggy” rather than “blurry”. And, the longer your focal length (distance from the front of your lens to your sensor) the foggier it gets, to the point where, if you’re using a superzoom lens, and your lens is way extended, the whole frame will be foggy, even the stuff that’s in focus. It’s weird, really.)
As with any accessory though, they are well worth playing around with, despite their limitations, especially given their really low price (20-30 bucks.) Again, you’ll definitely get better results with a true macro lens, but you’ll also be paying a heck of a lot more than most of us can afford to spend on such a niche-use lens. So, if macro seems fun (it totally is), go buy one, using that link above, so that I get a kickback from Amazon. We all win! Woooo!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 28-300 mm lens with Hoya Macro Kit. 1/200s, f/5.6, ISO 200. Focal length: 168mm.
Popularity: 14%
December 9, 2009 – Fly
Posted by Dave in Animals, Macro, Picture of the Day on December 9, 2009
Fly
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1111
I know, I know, a lot of you think pictures like this one are kind of disgusting. And let’s be honest, they kind of are. But they’re still really cool. And, you have to admit, it’s been quite awhile since I’ve posted one.
This was taken with the 18-55 mm kit lens that came with my Canon, reverse-mounted using one of these guys: http://bit.ly/hCi4n . It’s truly ridiculous how close-in you can get that way, and all you need is a cheesy little 13 dollar attachment. Unfortunately, since you’re attaching the lens to your camera backwards, you obviously don’t get the benefit of any of the electronic controls, which means the focus is totally manual (although focusing at that distance consists of simply rocking back and forth on the balls of your feet) and your aperture will be wide open. However, I don’t think shrinking the aperture would help you at all anyway, since there’s such a pitifully small amount of light reaching your sensor anyway.
As you can tell, the depth of field when taking pictures like this is quite literally microscopic. In normal landscape photography, you can take a photo with everything from 15 feet in front of you out to infinity all in focus. Here? The only thing in focus is a very narrow band between the fly’s back and the front of his head. We’re talking maybe a millimeter here. It’s weird. Another odd thing about doing this kind of stuff is how close you have to get to your subject. This fly was literally less than an inch from the front (well, the back) of my lens. As you can imagine, this introduces a whole host of new issues. Such as: flies tend to be a bit skittish. So it can be hard to get close enough to even get a picture. And, I don’t know about you, but I’m not good at standing perfectly still. I tend to rock back and forth a bit. When I’m taking a picture of a mountain, an inch or two in either direction doesn’t really make a difference. But when your depth of field is a millimeter, it’s a bit different. And, even on top of that, it’s worth pointing out that flies are FAST. They move a LOT. So while normally the biggest concern is using a fast enough shutter speed to avoid camera shake, with these shots you need to get much, much faster than that, so that you don’t get motion blur. (1/400th of a second is a great place to start.) So to say getting this picture was a bit frustrating a bit of an understatement. Let’s just say, it’s a good think I was shooting digital, because I had a couple hundred frames of complete garbage. (Not an exaggeration.)
One thing I like about these shots, and this one in particular, is that they’re very illustrative of what happens when you move away from the focal point. The eye is fantastic, because you can see what it looks like in focus, and you can very clearly see how it degrades from that into the general out of focus mushy stuff. Fun times, all around.
Before I let you go today, I’d like to point something out real quick. If you see that bit.ly link above ( http://bit.ly/hCi4n ), that’s a link to Amazon, to the actual reverse-mount attachment I use. If you use that link to go to Amazon, then buy ANYTHING on the site, it’s linked up to my referral account, so I get 4% of your purchase paid to me. So I would urge you, if you’re going to do any Amazon shopping this holiday season, to please go to Amazon via that link, help me out a bit. If you buy enough stuff, I’ll send you a free calendar!! What could be better than that?! Oh, a lot of stuff, you’re right. But it’s still pretty awesome!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, reverse-mounted 18-55 mm kit lens. 1/400s, ISO 800.
Popularity: 17%
November 10, 2009 – Bee and Daisy
Posted by Dave in Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on November 10, 2009
Bee and Daisy
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1097
Bees and daisies. Not the first time I’ve posted a picture like this, and it absolutely won’t be the last. Not a whole lot to say about though, we’ve already covered this ground.
Notes: Canon Eos Rebel T1i, Quantaray 70-300 mm macro lens. 1/500s, f/5.6, ISO 200. Focal length: 300mm.
Popularity: 15%
October 9, 2009 – Bee and Daisy
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Flowers, Macro, Picture of the Day on October 9, 2009
Bee and Daisy
Friday, October 9, 2009
http://www.davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1094
Another bee, another daisy, whatever. Awhile back I said I had a feeling in my gut that taking pictures of bees on flowers just may become my new obsession, and that turned out to be right on the mark. I have so many of these pictures that if I don’t spread them out, I’m going to scare away my whole audience. Well, “scare” isn’t the right word. “Annoy” is probably better.
If you’ve been reading and paying attention to this blog for awhile, you’ll know that the word “macro” can mean a lot of different things. As in, there are several levels of macro. I think the word itself (at least in the context of photography) generally just means focusing on things that are close (ie, “macro mode” on a point-and-shoot). In practice, it generally means taking pictures of little things – usually flowers – and having those little things be the big star of the show. There are a lot of camera lenses you can buy that say “Macro” on them, and it’s not entirely clear what exactly that means. I mean, there are true MACRO lenses, on in particular that I know about that has a magnification ratio of up to 5:1….
Hold up, let me take a step back. This confused me for awhile, so it’s worth talking about. Magnification ratio. I think we all know what the term is ABOUT (making things look big), but what does, say, 5:1 mean, exactly? Good question, let’s address that.
Right, magnification, magnification.. Let’s start with the easy case. A magnification ratio of 1:1. So, you all know basically how cameras work, right? You have this lens that focuses the light into a spot inside the camera, onto the sensor (or the film, in the case of a non-digital camera). In the case of a traditional 35mm camera, the target is, yes, 35 mm across. In most digital cameras, it’s a little bit smaller. (Although there are digital cameras, usually the higher-end SLRs, that have a full-size (meaning 35mm) sensor. I’m not going to go into what differences that makes here.) Regardless, there’s a target where the light coming through the lens is focused. With me so far?
Normally, when the light that will be making your picture is shining on the target/sensor, it’s quite a bit smaller than the real thing. If you’re taking a picture of a mountain, or a person, the real thing is almost certainly less than 35mm across. Let’s say that you are taking a picture of your buddy, and for simplicity let’s say that you’re using a 35mm camera, and, also for simplicity, let’s say your buddy’s face is exactly 350mm across. If you take a picture where the edges of your buddy’s face exactly touch the edge, then you’re working with a magnification ratio of 1:10. Make sense? The number before the colon is the size on the target, the number after is the size in real life. So, 1mm on the sensor represents 10mm in real life. Let’s say you get a bunch closer, and zoom all the way in, so that now you can only fit in half of the face. Well, now the ratio is 1:5, since you’ve got a 175mm (350mm divided by 2) object that’s 35mm across on the sensor.
So, following that pattern, we can get to the idea of 1:1 magnification. Meaning, something that’s, say, 10mm across (like a bug) will be exactly 10mm across in the image being shined on the sensor. 1:1 is actually a very LARGE amount of magnification as far as cameras are usually concerned. Because if you then view that image on your computer screen, that 10mm bug (that’s a centimeter) will take up a third of the frame. That’s BIG!
So, to take it one step further, imagine what happens when you get to, say, 2:1, or 3:1. Now the image on the sensor is BIGGER than real life, and the results will be more and more ridiculous. This is the part that got me for awhile, there is a **HUGE** difference between a magnification ratio of 2:1, and a ratio of 1:2. (Well, there is a 4x difference, to be precise.)
Camera lenses that supposedly do “macro” usually specify a “maximum magnification ratio”. What that means is, through a combination of zooming in and getting to the closest point that the lens will focus, that is the *maximum* ratio that you can get with that lens. In my experience. any lens that will get you to a 1:1 ratio or beyond will cost a LOT of money, as in, at least a thousand bucks generally. And they’re hard to find. But lots of lenses still claim that they do “macro”. Most of those lenses will usually get you to a 1:4 ratio, sometimes 1:2. That’s a big difference from 1:1, but it as long as you’re taking pictures of things that aren’t TOO small (like, a flower, for example), you can get a great image. If you’re hoping to shoot images of the little hairs on a fly, then you’ll need something more.
So, this image, while still in the “macro” realm, clearly isn’t at the extreme end of the spectrum. This one was taken with the lens that I recently settled on to be my primary mid-range lens, the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. (Amazon link: http://bit.ly/z7D8t ). It’s got its maximum magnification ratio listed at 1:3.9. So, definitely not extreme, but enough to get some nice flower shots. And actually, I don’t believe I was at the maximum end of the spectrum either.
There are a variety of methods I’ve used to get in further, which have been covered in some detail in earlier posts. If you want to read more about those, just go back into the archives, or ask me, I’m happy to talk about it at length. But, here’s a quick list: I have a big telephoto (70-300 mm) lens that has a macro mode that gets in to about 1:2, I’ve got a “macro kit”, which is basically a set of magnifying lenses that you put on your lens like any other filter, that help you focus closer and magnify the image a bit, and I have a reverse-mount that I put on my 18-55mm kit lens. THAT gets you some ridiculous magnification. Well beyond 1:1, although I’m not sure how far beyond. Fun stuff to play around with, and all quite a bit more affordable than a $1000+ macro-specific lens.
So there you go. Please do let me know if you want to know more about my macro explorations. I’m still an extreme beginner, but there’s a lot of fun ground to cover. So, have a great weekend!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lens. 1/320s, f/7.1, ISO 100. Focal length: 75mm.
Popularity: 7%
August 31, 2009 – Green Bottle Fly
Posted by Dave in - Best of Dave's POTD -, Animals, Macro, Picture of the Day on August 31, 2009
Green Bottle Fly
Monday, August 31, 2009
http://davefry.net/rate/index.php?viewimage=1042
Okay, I’ll admit, this is getting a bit ridiculous. Ever since I posted that bee and flower a few weeks ago, I’ve sort of gone off the deep end with this macro obsession. (Well, to be fair, it was always there, it’s just been latent until recently, when I realized I could satisfy my unhealthy urges without shelling out too much cash.)
First, it was busting out my old lens, then it was the Hoya macro kit. Now, I’ve moved on to a reverse-mount attachment, and oh my god, it’s incredible.
This little device is just a metal ring that attaches to the front of your lens like a filter. Then, you pop off your lens, and literally just attach it to the camera backwards. As in, what was once the butt-end of the lens, the private parts that were once only visible to the camera’s sensor, is now exposed for the whole world to see. And the magnification that gets you is, for lack of a better word, ludicrous. I’ve just been using the simple, basic, cheap 18-55 mm kit lens that came with the camera. And at the 18mm end, it’s too close in to even work with. Fantastic! (Since it’s on there backwards, everything is reversed, so whereas normally lower numbers mean more wide-angle, here it means you’re closer in.) This photo was much closer to the 55 end of the lens, and it’s still pretty close in, as you can see. The drawback is of course that your depth of field is, quite literally, microscopic. You can see for yourself how narrow that band of in-focus-ness is on the leaf. That’s probably where the difference between a 13 dollar attachment on a free lens and a $1400 macro-specific beast lies. Or maybe not. Until I drop that 1400 bucks (probably next week at this rate), I won’t know for sure. It’s really tough to use, for a couple reasons. First of all, I tend to sway back and forth when I’m taking a picture. If I’m shooting a mountain, not a problem. But if you only have a millimeter or two of focus to play with, an inch or two in either direction obviously kills the shot. Second, if you’re looking a flower or something, the slightest gasp of wind sends your subject on a wild roller coaster ride in and out of the frame. Patience is an absolute necessity, it can get pretty frustrating. A tripod definitely helps, or at the very least something to steady the camera against. (Like a gorilla pod! – that’s what I used for these shots.)
Now, I’ve just got to figure out the whole lighting situation. This shot was taken with natural light, because it was bright and sunny. Any other conditions (the day before I was trying to work with late-afternoon light with only limited success) and you’ve got to jack the ISO up to 1600 minimum to even START getting results. I’ll let you all know what I figure out when I figure that one out. Maybe tomorrow I’ll post another super-ridiculous-macro shot, sans insect. We’ll see how I feel.)
Enjoy your Monday!
Notes: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, reverse-mounted 18-55 mm kit lens. 1/200s, ISO 200.
Popularity: 16%