Thematic The Macro Flower Club

Dewman · 12-10-2014, 06:06 AM

Originally posted by stormtech

I know it looks like some really bad sharpening artifacts, but there isn't - this is actually how this flower looks:

That's wild, Sterling! What the heck is it? Nice capture. What lens were you using?

stormtech · 12-10-2014, 07:49 AM - **3 Likes**

Originally posted by Dewman

That's wild, Sterling! What the heck is it? Nice capture. What lens were you using?

It's a variety of Bee Balm - I guess the correct term is Monarda

Shot with the K-30 w/DFA 100 WR.

The pic above is when the flower is about half bloomed - the center shoots are just starting. Here is the same flower fully bloomed:

eddie1960 · 12-10-2014, 08:06 AM - **2 Likes**

55 tak on extension tubes, handheld after a couple of glasses of wine no less

Dewman · 12-10-2014, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by stormtech

It's a variety of Bee Balm - I guess the correct term is Monarda

Shot with the K-30 w/DFA 100 WR.

The pic above is when the flower is about half bloomed - the center shoots are just starting. Here is the same flower fully bloomed:

Wild looking, for sure. Man oh man.... I sure like the images the 100mm WR turns out. Very good.

**mtngal** · 12-10-2014, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by stormtech

I know it looks like some really bad sharpening artifacts, but there isn't - this is actually how this flower looks:

Fascinating flower!

Dewman · 12-11-2014, 01:24 AM - **2 Likes**

Midnight flower shoot with a Sigma 28-80mm macro, 1:2, with a TRIPOD!

stormtech · 12-11-2014, 05:47 AM

Originally posted by Dewman

Midnight flower shoot with a Sigma 28-80mm macro, 1:2, with a TRIPOD!

Just beautiful! Very sharp and perfect lighting/exposure.

Dewman · 12-11-2014, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by stormtech

Just beautiful! Very sharp and perfect lighting/exposure.

Thank you, kind sir! I tried something new on the second one. I bought a bottle of glycerin, mixed it with about 75% water and sprayed the flower. It increases the surface tension of the droplets and they "stick" to the flower without running off as fast. Good? Bad? The jury is still out. The more I try the "artificial raindrops," the less I think I like it. Now, if I was to get up really, REALLY close.... it might enhance it enough to make a real difference, but at 1:2, I don't think so. Maybe I'll have to try it with a reversing ring and see what happens.

old4570 · 12-11-2014, 10:05 PM - **1 Like**

My back is way too stiff to get lower down for a better angle !

---------- Post added 12-12-14 at 04:06 PM ----------

Originally posted by Dewman

Midnight flower shoot with a Sigma 28-80mm macro, 1:2, with a TRIPOD!

Crazy good !
That is really fantastic , and that's no lip service !

Dewman · 12-11-2014, 11:46 PM

Originally posted by old4570

My back is way too stiff to get lower down for a better angle !

---------- Post added 12-12-14 at 04:06 PM ----------

Crazy good !
That is really fantastic , and that's no lip service !

Holy cow, Matt! That's a mighty fine image there, son! You're really nudging me toward the Pentax 100mm lens! If I understand right, it's a 1:2 magnification, but with the 1.5 TC, it brings it closer to 1:1, right?

I hear ya' about the back! Some days mine's not too bad, then other days, it's a mother dog! Today, not so bad. But, I think that's because I've been shooting static shots, standing up, with my subject on the dining table. Oh, but to be young and supple again..... sigh.

old4570 · 12-12-2014, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by Dewman

Holy cow, Matt! That's a mighty fine image there, son! You're really nudging me toward the Pentax 100mm lens! If I understand right, it's a 1:2 magnification, but with the 1.5 TC, it brings it closer to 1:1, right?

I hear ya' about the back! Some days mine's not too bad, then other days, it's a mother dog! Today, not so bad. But, I think that's because I've been shooting static shots, standing up, with my subject on the dining table. Oh, but to be young and supple again..... sigh.

Lens is 1:2 or half life size , as produced by the sensor ..
A 1.5 tele Converter makes the lens 150mm Rather than 100mm ...
So it becomes a 1:2 150mm Lens .
But yes , the zoom compensates for the 1:2 , making the image larger ..
I have seen amazing Macro taken with 500mm Lenses that focus down to 1 meter or there about's .. And its all because of that 500mm ...
That's why there are 1001 ways of doing macro , almost any lens can produce Macro images with just a little imagination ..
That Tamron Zoom lens of yours , if you put a +2 close focus filter in front of it , it would turn it into a Macro lens .

I hear you about being young again ! ( I have made it to the ache'y breaky Pain years , and it blows )

Dewman · 12-12-2014, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by old4570

Lens is 1:2 or half life size , as produced by the sensor ..
A 1.5 tele Converter makes the lens 150mm Rather than 100mm ...
So it becomes a 1:2 150mm Lens .
But yes , the zoom compensates for the 1:2 , making the image larger ..
I have seen amazing Macro taken with 500mm Lenses that focus down to 1 meter or there about's .. And its all because of that 500mm ...
That's why there are 1001 ways of doing macro , almost any lens can produce Macro images with just a little imagination ..
That Tamron Zoom lens of yours , if you put a +2 close focus filter in front of it , it would turn it into a Macro lens .

I hear you about being young again ! ( I have made it to the ache'y breaky Pain years , and it blows )

The image, "The Missing Link," I posted in Post Your Photos was taken with a 300mm Quantaray zoom. My Tamron 28-200mm , when out to 200mm, will almost reach 1:2 ratio, also. I have a set of the close focus filters, but... believe it or not.... I've never tried them! A whole set, made by Vivitar, +1, +2, +3 & +10. Go figure!

I have no excuse. I'm gonna' go right now and give it a try!

Dewman · 12-12-2014, 01:54 AM - **1 Like**

O.K., this is my very first time to try these. I've had them for about 6 months and I can't believe I've never used them! Anyway, the first image is with a Sigma 28-80mm, 1:2 macro lens. My close up filters were 52mm, and the Sigma lens was 55mm, so..... I tried them on a Sears 28mm macro. The second image is with the Sears, sans close up filter. The last image is with a +3 close up filter.

I'm really quite surprised at not only the difference in magnification, but at the IQ. For some reason, I was expecting a marked degrading of the image quality.... but it ain't so.... not as far as my feeble old eyes can see. Keep in mind, these little carnations are only about 1 inch across.... maybe a little bit more!

A new avenue to take in the world of macro flower photography. And to think, it's been right under my nose all this time!

old4570 · 12-12-2014, 02:15 AM

Fantastic shots !
Got to taste the pudding to know if its good or not !

Dewman · 12-12-2014, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by old4570

Fantastic shots !
Got to taste the pudding to know if its good or not !

Thanks.... but, you know what? They lack that certain "pop,"..... that 3-dimensional quality, the delineation that comes with the high-end macro lenses. The carnations look incredibly one-dimensional! Exactly like looking at an image on a flat piece of paper. Of course, that's what it is.... but you know what I'm talking about. Now, the photo of mine of the pink and white flower.... about two or three posts earlier.... it has a little more of a 3-D effect, but not much. I think the quality that I like so much comes from a hard, highly defined "edge" on the subject. I discussed this with a friend who is an artist.... a well-known painter.... and she said that in her paintings, to achieve this, she uses a 3-hair, Chinese bristle brush and makes a very fine, almost microscopic black line around the subject. Odd how some lenses are capable of this wonderful effect. The science of lens design is a curious affair, eh?

12-11-2014, 01:24 AM - 2 Likes	#336
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Pinks and greens and oranges Midnight flower shoot with a Sigma 28-80mm macro, 1:2, with a TRIPOD! Last edited by Dewman; 03-25-2015 at 04:36 PM.

12-12-2014, 01:54 AM - 1 Like	#343
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Experiment with close up filters. O.K., this is my very first time to try these. I've had them for about 6 months and I can't believe I've never used them! Anyway, the first image is with a Sigma 28-80mm, 1:2 macro lens. My close up filters were 52mm, and the Sigma lens was 55mm, so..... I tried them on a Sears 28mm macro. The second image is with the Sears, sans close up filter. The last image is with a +3 close up filter. I'm really quite surprised at not only the difference in magnification, but at the IQ. For some reason, I was expecting a marked degrading of the image quality.... but it ain't so.... not as far as my feeble old eyes can see. Keep in mind, these little carnations are only about 1 inch across.... maybe a little bit more! A new avenue to take in the world of macro flower photography. And to think, it's been right under my nose all this time! Last edited by Dewman; 03-25-2015 at 04:36 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
SMC Pentax-F 50mm F2.8 Macro - LENS CLUB	tgchan	Lens Clubs	12	11-15-2019 08:26 PM
Nature Flower photos from club outing	markvc	Post Your Photos!	1	05-17-2016 12:28 PM
Nature Fading spring flower, and purple flower.	the swede	Post Your Photos!	5	06-18-2010 03:05 AM
Flower within a flower (macro)	heliphoto	Post Your Photos!	4	04-28-2009 01:03 PM
Flower question - Gary or other flower experts	Igilligan	Post Your Photos!	5	02-23-2009 12:18 AM

12-10-2014, 06:06 AM	#331
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Originally posted by stormtech I know it looks like some really bad sharpening artifacts, but there isn't - this is actually how this flower looks: That's wild, Sterling! What the heck is it? Nice capture. What lens were you using?

12-10-2014, 07:49 AM - 3 Likes	#332
stormtech Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: In the boonies (NW Penna) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,744	Originally posted by Dewman That's wild, Sterling! What the heck is it? Nice capture. What lens were you using? It's a variety of Bee Balm - I guess the correct term is Monarda Shot with the K-30 w/DFA 100 WR. The pic above is when the flower is about half bloomed - the center shoots are just starting. Here is the same flower fully bloomed:

12-10-2014, 08:06 AM - 2 Likes	#333
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	55 tak on extension tubes, handheld after a couple of glasses of wine no less

12-10-2014, 12:59 PM	#334
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Originally posted by stormtech It's a variety of Bee Balm - I guess the correct term is Monarda Shot with the K-30 w/DFA 100 WR. The pic above is when the flower is about half bloomed - the center shoots are just starting. Here is the same flower fully bloomed: Wild looking, for sure. Man oh man.... I sure like the images the 100mm WR turns out. Very good.

12-10-2014, 09:28 PM	#335
mtngal Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Wherever I’m Parked Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,003	Originally posted by stormtech I know it looks like some really bad sharpening artifacts, but there isn't - this is actually how this flower looks: Fascinating flower!

12-11-2014, 05:47 AM	#337
stormtech Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: In the boonies (NW Penna) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,744	Originally posted by Dewman Midnight flower shoot with a Sigma 28-80mm macro, 1:2, with a TRIPOD! Just beautiful! Very sharp and perfect lighting/exposure.

12-11-2014, 11:40 AM	#338
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Originally posted by stormtech Just beautiful! Very sharp and perfect lighting/exposure. Thank you, kind sir! I tried something new on the second one. I bought a bottle of glycerin, mixed it with about 75% water and sprayed the flower. It increases the surface tension of the droplets and they "stick" to the flower without running off as fast. Good? Bad? The jury is still out. The more I try the "artificial raindrops," the less I think I like it. Now, if I was to get up really, REALLY close.... it might enhance it enough to make a real difference, but at 1:2, I don't think so. Maybe I'll have to try it with a reversing ring and see what happens.

12-11-2014, 10:05 PM - 1 Like	#339
old4570 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 2,551	My back is way too stiff to get lower down for a better angle ! ---------- Post added 12-12-14 at 04:06 PM ---------- Originally posted by Dewman Midnight flower shoot with a Sigma 28-80mm macro, 1:2, with a TRIPOD! Crazy good ! That is really fantastic , and that's no lip service !

12-11-2014, 11:46 PM	#340
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Originally posted by old4570 My back is way too stiff to get lower down for a better angle ! ---------- Post added 12-12-14 at 04:06 PM ---------- Crazy good ! That is really fantastic , and that's no lip service ! Holy cow, Matt! That's a mighty fine image there, son! You're really nudging me toward the Pentax 100mm lens! If I understand right, it's a 1:2 magnification, but with the 1.5 TC, it brings it closer to 1:1, right? I hear ya' about the back! Some days mine's not too bad, then other days, it's a mother dog! Today, not so bad. But, I think that's because I've been shooting static shots, standing up, with my subject on the dining table. Oh, but to be young and supple again..... sigh.

12-12-2014, 12:06 AM	#341
old4570 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 2,551	Originally posted by Dewman Holy cow, Matt! That's a mighty fine image there, son! You're really nudging me toward the Pentax 100mm lens! If I understand right, it's a 1:2 magnification, but with the 1.5 TC, it brings it closer to 1:1, right? I hear ya' about the back! Some days mine's not too bad, then other days, it's a mother dog! Today, not so bad. But, I think that's because I've been shooting static shots, standing up, with my subject on the dining table. Oh, but to be young and supple again..... sigh. Lens is 1:2 or half life size , as produced by the sensor .. A 1.5 tele Converter makes the lens 150mm Rather than 100mm ... So it becomes a 1:2 150mm Lens . But yes , the zoom compensates for the 1:2 , making the image larger .. I have seen amazing Macro taken with 500mm Lenses that focus down to 1 meter or there about's .. And its all because of that 500mm ... That's why there are 1001 ways of doing macro , almost any lens can produce Macro images with just a little imagination .. That Tamron Zoom lens of yours , if you put a +2 close focus filter in front of it , it would turn it into a Macro lens . I hear you about being young again ! ( I have made it to the ache'y breaky Pain years , and it blows )

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-12-2014, 12:13 AM	#342
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Originally posted by old4570 Lens is 1:2 or half life size , as produced by the sensor .. A 1.5 tele Converter makes the lens 150mm Rather than 100mm ... So it becomes a 1:2 150mm Lens . But yes , the zoom compensates for the 1:2 , making the image larger .. I have seen amazing Macro taken with 500mm Lenses that focus down to 1 meter or there about's .. And its all because of that 500mm ... That's why there are 1001 ways of doing macro , almost any lens can produce Macro images with just a little imagination .. That Tamron Zoom lens of yours , if you put a +2 close focus filter in front of it , it would turn it into a Macro lens . I hear you about being young again ! ( I have made it to the ache'y breaky Pain years , and it blows ) The image, "The Missing Link," I posted in Post Your Photos was taken with a 300mm Quantaray zoom. My Tamron 28-200mm , when out to 200mm, will almost reach 1:2 ratio, also. I have a set of the close focus filters, but... believe it or not.... I've never tried them! A whole set, made by Vivitar, +1, +2, +3 & +10. Go figure! I have no excuse. I'm gonna' go right now and give it a try!

12-12-2014, 02:15 AM	#344
old4570 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 2,551	Fantastic shots ! Got to taste the pudding to know if its good or not !

12-12-2014, 03:41 PM	#345
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Originally posted by old4570 Fantastic shots ! Got to taste the pudding to know if its good or not ! Thanks.... but, you know what? They lack that certain "pop,"..... that 3-dimensional quality, the delineation that comes with the high-end macro lenses. The carnations look incredibly one-dimensional! Exactly like looking at an image on a flat piece of paper. Of course, that's what it is.... but you know what I'm talking about. Now, the photo of mine of the pink and white flower.... about two or three posts earlier.... it has a little more of a 3-D effect, but not much. I think the quality that I like so much comes from a hard, highly defined "edge" on the subject. I discussed this with a friend who is an artist.... a well-known painter.... and she said that in her paintings, to achieve this, she uses a 3-hair, Chinese bristle brush and makes a very fine, almost microscopic black line around the subject. Odd how some lenses are capable of this wonderful effect. The science of lens design is a curious affair, eh?