Macro Photography

[Kalvaer]

Turn it to sRGB.

Do the colour spaces make that much of a difference?

You're not using the live view, by any chance, are you?

Depends on what I am doing. Though even when I am using Live view I have it set to hybrid mode. In this it does a quick AF using the live view, and the switches over to the sensor AF. Now from what I have read. Olympus have some of the quickest AF in the world. What they fail to mention is that this is in well lit situations. In dark light environments it battles quite a bit to reach full focus. I have read up on exactly why, though cant think of the exact wording right now to explain why its different. Dont get me wrong. It does reach perfect focus, but it takes a long time and strobes the flash to reach it. So its just quicker to manually focus once you get used to it.

He's drunk the coolaid - how likely is it that he'd willingly go back to jpgs . . .

Ok.. you owe me a new keyboard... I seriously spilled cream soda all over it right now

 

[ldmelsa]

Do the colour spaces make that much of a difference?

Yes, for your jpgs. So stop typing on the forum and switch it already. Your shop's minilab wants it in sRGB, and the Internet wants it in sRGB. You'll gain nothing by having to convert it. Why does Olympus set the cam to AdobeRGB? I have never seen a camera who's factory defaults are like that.

 

[AntiThesis]

1DMk3 - another problem is the 50mm f/1.8 I was using is suffering as of late and might not stand up to the strain. The new 50mm arrives next week but it is larger in diameter and probably wont fit.

Nope - need a new solution.

Yeah fair enough - I wouldn't screw around with that either. Why won't the new 50 fit? Or will it just not fit for reversal?

 

[Kalvaer]

Yes, for your jpgs. So stop typing on the forum and switch it already. Your shop's minilab wants it in sRGB, and the Internet wants it in sRGB. You'll gain nothing by having to convert it. Why does Olympus set the cam to AdobeRGB? I have never seen a camera who's factory defaults are like that.

I never go to a minilab Its also not there by default. I switched it to the adobe while testing and couldn't see a difference. So I just never bothered switching it back. Also, if I'm shooting in RAW, will it make a difference?

 

[marine1]

What is the benefit of shooting RGB?

 

[bwana]

Yeah fair enough - I wouldn't screw around with that either. Why won't the new 50 fit? Or will it just not fit for reversal?

Just for the reversal. The old 50 would fit snugly inside the recess for the bayonet fixture on the camera so it wouldnt slide around.

I never go to a minilab Its also not there by default. I switched it to the adobe while testing and couldn't see a difference. So I just never bothered switching it back. Also, if I'm shooting in RAW, will it make a difference?

No - you just want to make sure you're outputting to the correct colour space right at the end.

And sorry about the keyboard.

What is the benefit of shooting RGB?

Both are RGB the question is which is better for you sRGB or Adobe RGB - http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm

 

[AntiThesis]

Just for the reversal. The old 50 would fit snugly inside the recess for the bayonet fixture on the camera so it wouldnt slide around.

Could try stacking lenses and using back to back filters

 

[bwana]

Could try stacking lenses and using back to back filters

I might try that.

 

[marine1]

But is RGB better than shooting in RAW? Why would one use it?

 

[AntiThesis]

I might try that.

It's nice n easy - just make sure you blank out all the holes and such. I just got two old ones, smashed out the glass part and set them back to back with epoxy. Works like a dream.

 

[bwana]

But is RGB better than shooting in RAW? Why would one use it?

No - but if you're one of "those people" still shooting in jpg then you need to determine what you're going to be doing with the photo and set the colour space accordingly.

 

[ldmelsa]

He's drunk the coolaid - how likely is it that he'd willingly go back to jpgs . . .

Well, his got an E620. I'm sure it's a great camera. I've never used it, and neither have you (I guess). You should not underestimate what the latest gen cams can do. I'll reserve my judgement about the E620's jpg until I can use one. Specs look great. Results look great. The guy at the shop tells me that the Canons are better in raw than jpg, but that's not true for all makes. As you know, I've found this out for myself. When I bought my D90, he told me that I didn't have to shoot raw any more. Being a Canon shooter, I thought he was crazy. But then I remembered that this guy has been doing this, and pro shoots, for 20 years. I spoke to three other pro shooters about Nikon jpgs, and they all said the same thing. So, before saying the E620's jpg are not good, I'll give Kalvaer the benefit of the doubt. I'm not an imaging engineer, but I do know what can be done with 2007 (D300/D3) technology. Just because we don't understand the technology does not mean it's not there.

but if you're one of "those people" still shooting in jpg

 

[bwana]

Well, his got an E620. I'm sure it's a great camera. I've never used it, and neither have you (I guess). You should not underestimate what the latest gen cams can do. I'll reserve my judgement about the E620's jpg until I can use one. Specs look great. Results look great. The guy at the shop tells me that the Canons are better in raw than jpg, but that's not true for all makes. As you know, I've found this out for myself. When I bought my D90, he told me that I didn't have to shoot raw any more. Being a Canon shooter, I thought he was crazy. But then I remembered that this guy has been doing this, and pro shoots, for 20 years. I spoke to three other pro shooters about Nikon jpgs, and they all said the same thing. So, before saying the E620's jpg are not good, I'll give Kalvaer the benefit of the doubt. I'm not an imaging engineer, but I do know what can be done with 2007 (D300/D3) technology. Just because we don't understand the technology does not mean it's not there.

lol - I'm not going to get into this with you again. I can't possibly add anything that hasn't already been said.

 

[Kalvaer]

Ok, since I think Bwana posted that link for me before and I didn't get around to reading it then. I forced myself to this time.

Now considering that I dont go to photo labs and print all my own images on 1 of 2 printers. First being a CYMK laser printer that uses Adobe colour space, and the other being a Canon photo inkjet. Would Adobe not be better for my images (from a printing perspective if I understood the article correctly)

 

[bwana]

Ok, since I think Bwana posted that link for me before and I didn't get around to reading it then. I forced myself to this time.

Now considering that I dont go to photo labs and print all my own images on 1 of 2 printers. First being a CYMK laser printer that uses Adobe colour space, and the other being a Canon photo inkjet. Would Adobe not be better for my images (from a printing perspective if I understood the article correctly)

You mean if you were going to sacrifice IQ for file size and shoot in JPG instead of RAW? Then maybe it would.

 

[swift412]

Canon 350D, ±55mm of extension tubes, FD to EF converter, Canon FD 50mm f/3.5 Macro (all pics resampled down, not cropped)

Focus at infinity:

Focus at 23.2cm (1:2):

w/ EF-S 18-55, so you can get a sense of scale:

 

[bwana]

Ok - so break it to me gently - how much are these extension tubes going to cost . . .

 

[BigAl-sa]

Ok - so break it to me gently - how much are these extension tubes going to cost . . .

Flipping ripoff I paid less than R700 off ebay about 3 yrs back. But then the Canon stuff is an even bigger ripoff. At least with the Kenkos, you're getting 68mm of tubes. Even B&H is a ripoff

 

[BigAl-sa]

Flipping ripoff I paid less than R700 off ebay about 3 yrs back. But then the Canon stuff is an even bigger ripoff. At least with the Kenkos, you're getting 68mm of tubes. Even B&H is a ripoff

I found these on ebay now, Oz$112. The auction has ended, but the seller was a photography shop, so you could try contact them.

 

[swift412]

I paid R83 for a bunch of no-name brand ones on eBay.

No electrical contacts, so no aperture control. That's fine if you're using a lens with an aperture ring, but if you're using an EF/EF-S lens, the lens will stay at it's widest aperture (unless you unmount the lens while holding down the Depth of Field preview button).

The extension rings themselves do a good job of holding everything in place, but the build quality sucks and they feel a bit flimsy.