This thread is dedicated to close-range photographic captures utilising macro-optical imaging configurations to achieve greater reproduction ratios. Got it? Good now upload some shit.Last thread: >>4433352
>>4485226Use your fist as a bean bag, use burst mode and press the camera into your fist while shooting
>>4484829The Laowa's great but whatever's cheaper/more convenient to use for you
>>4498425>>4498426that guyforgot to say that the lens was 18mm and focuses 5mm in front of the lens. apparently you can't do manual focus staking with wide lenses as the working distance is too small. and end up touching the subject or unusable size distortioni ended up buying the Tamron new on sale for 500 euro, laowa was 450. now kind of regret it after playing with the Tamron and kind of getting the hang of handheld focus staking. but for non moving subjects tammy is perfect.now i m waiting for godox 860iii to go on sale to get a powerful reliable flash. but i m kind of torn between getting the laowa (500 euro again) or reynox 250 (70 euro). tammy and reynox give 1.8 mag compared with laowa native 2x. i have also 36mm extension tubes that i can use to increase tammy and reynox mag but i don;t know the actual resulting working distance and iq.30 stack
has anyone tried stacking those macro lens filters?
>>4498494yeshttps://makrodunyasi.com/en/macro-close-up-filters-raynox-dcr-250-msn-202/hes a turkroach so if anybody know something about shooting insects is this guyalso this guy bought a
>>4498497https://www.dpreview.com/forums/threads/stacking-raynox-250-and-202.4811264/
>>4498494yip, you use the more intense, more protruding ones on the outer side and the less strong ones on the inner side
>>4498454Don't bother with the Raynox or tubes, screwing it on and off is too much of a hassleAnd consider going for the Godox MK12, it's a dedicated macro flash that's sometimes more, sometimes less useful than a proper on-camera flash
I have a 100 2.8 macro which I use for scanning and the ocasional portrait/detail shot. I cant get into macro pictures because they freak me out, especially bc I have intense trypophobia (google it at your own risk) and everything seems to have little holes in it when you zoom in. On the other hand I think its very interesting looking at things close up, maybe I need exposure therapy
>>4498521raynox have some clip on clip - off system. that is why i m considering itgodox mk12 kit is more expensive (almost 2x times - you get 2 flashes and 1 trigger though ) and seems harder to diffuse. considering the 860 as is very powerful and can be used as a normal flash for other types of photos. i suppose that mk12 could be too. will put it on my wish list. if it comes on sale at good price i ll consider it
>>4498563Macro flashes don't need to be diffused to the same extent because they're usually much closer to the subject (diffusion is most effective at mid-range flash distances)Also the idea behind the MK is more sculpturing and less uniform exposure
>>4498494yeah i got some cheap ones and put a doublet element in front that i took from a vintage manual zoom lens, total is 4 additional elements on top of a zoom PnS
>>4476905>A well done beginners shot like most in this thread.What the FUCK did you just call my photographic capture!?
Hi /mage/I took my first ever macro shots, nailing the focus while the subject is walking with such a small DOF is insanely hard. I just try to move the camera back and forth to focus and leave it in manual because the autofocus is useless.I use a D750 and an old AF Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8, any idea when diffraction starts ruining your shots at high apertures? I didn't dare to go above f/11. Also it's not the D version so no communication with the built in flash. Is it worth using a macro flash or is it overkill?
>>4500848Ditto, impossible to get both the head and abdomen in focus.
>>4500848Also the built-in flash tends to be a bit too aggressive and forces me to underexpose in post for shiny bugs
Hey lads, I want to try macro photography but I only have a Sony R100 III, it has a fixed lens and it's not particularly successful at doing good closeups. Are there any ways to make it work still? Maybe with a rig that has a magnifier in front or something?
>roll
>>4501197Close up filters. You won't be able to screw one onto your lens, but if you find some other way to attach it, it should work.
Shit wa quality and indoors no flash
What if I don't have spiders in my house? What if there was one but he went somewhere and I don't know where he is?
>>4501399also anybody knows ho to avoid this fucking halos around subjects during stacking? zerene and helicon bot get them. tried using the settings they suggest but still get themalso if i have subjects in the foreground and background they het this halos around them and they get blended together like one objectPic related
really impressed by this ancient camera
>>4501361Neat, I'll figure something out then. Thanks for the suggestion.
>>4501197>>4501361Raynox do close up filters that clamp onto the lens, and you can also get a Magfilter adapter which is what I have.
>>4501481Not that anon but what magnifier adaptorJust bought nisi 49mm 9 diopter. Was cheaper than raynox on sale but does not have the clip on adapter
>>4501481does the magfilter hold well with the Raynox? It looks a bit bulky. Might just go that route, it will also open up some possibility to use other filters.
>>4501481The filter grabs the lens by inside thread not from outisde. Just check some reviews an how it works.Might not have anything to grab on that lens. You could try some rubber tube that fits your lens and the adaptor diameter. There are some rubber lens hoods, quite cheap on aliexpress that you could adapt
>>4501499Oh I was thinking of the DCR-250 but it clamps internally on the filter threads, my mistake.>>4501521The Raynox is a fairly small bit of glass at 49mm and then the rest is plastic, I have a larger 58mm Canon close up lens with a metal filter thread that I use on mine and it holds fine even shaking the camera about.
Tamron 70-300
Wish me luck boys
>>4501897What film will you be using?
>>4501898I want to shoot Tri-x at 1600, I don't really care about the grain.
>>4501912Interesting, really curious about the results. Good luck!
No bugs to shootShoot some random shit Tamron 90mm15pic stack
>>4502097>bugs to shootWdym? Its spring homie.
>>4502097Isn't it kinda amazing that they managed to get their name on the plastic sleeve, as tiny as it is. Probably most people can't even read it.
