What's that? Did someone call my name?
Originally posted by Rondec I think the best thing is to start with pseudo macro and gradually get closer.
Yes, I would tend to agree, especially if fun is important to you. Ease into it, and as your technique improves, increase the magnification. I actually started with a "close focus" lens that only went to 1:2.8 and then a Pentax-M 50mm F/4 Macro that "only" does to 1:2. (Then a 2X tele-converter, then tubes, then a true (1:1) macro lens, then a diopter. I think.) One of my best "early moves", as I think back, was to make a Pringles-can flash diffuser for my (then) K-01 onboard flash.
As others have mentioned, there are so many different ways to do macro. Both technique-wise - diopters, macro lenses, extension tubes, reversed lenses, stacked lenses, etc - as well as style-wise. For me, I decided very early on that I didn't want to do studio shots, or shots of dead or refrigerated insects. It was also important for me to get some shots I was happy with and to get pleasure from the discovery of the small world of insects as I went along. Who knew there can be so many different species of spiders on the outside wall of one's house? I also had a lot of fun from trying out various lenses and "low-tech" techniques.
If I had tried to do handheld focus stacks at greater than lifesize right from the start, I would have probably given up by now.
The advice in this video by Thomas Shahan is still wonderful:
Quote: It is really, really tough to get some of the shots that folks like Pascal (Doundounba) pull off really easily.
Well, maybe it seems easy, but you don't see all the missed shots! A recent backyard garden outing consisted of 266 frames, and resulted in *four* published photos. Granted, three were stacks, but still, if you're getting over 10% keepers, my hat's off to you. (Either that or you're putting the bar
way lower than me, and/or you like to publish 20 practically identical shots.)
BTW, on the subject of DoF, here's a comparison for you from a recent stack. The first image below is actually the last of the twelve frames that went into making the focus stack immediately below. Note that even the single frame is shot at F/20! I tried to do similar postprocessing on the single frame as I did on the stack, but I processed the stack a while back, so they're not quite identical. Still it should give you an idea of DoF differences. This partially explains why many shots of long insects are profiles - because it's very difficult to get the whole body in focus unless it's a profile.
Do note also that I think even the single frame was "publishable", since the nearest eye is in focus (same rule as for portraits of humans)...
p.s.: Oh, and here's a link to
the stack on Flickr, if you want to see it in higher resolution.
Last edited by Doundounba; 08-04-2017 at 11:35 AM.
Reason: Add link to stack on Flickr