Springtail - Collembola - Orchesella villosa? - Page 2

Jason Green · #11 (**permalink**) 20-02-2009, 07:07 PM

Oh no, that is so sad. RIP Steve, it's a very in-depth site.

...

JRsbugs · #12 (**permalink**) 20-02-2009, 07:19 PM

Thanks Action Man, I found your pics too, some good ones there. I will be keeping a look out for them from now.

That is sad news about SH!

I wonder who maintains the site.

Action_Man · #13 (**permalink**) 21-02-2009, 05:04 PM

The site hasent been updated for years, i think, his wife keeps an eye on any e-mails that come through the site though ...

Bruce Williams · #14 (**permalink**) 21-02-2009, 06:41 PM

Hi Janet,

I've been using the Nikon 105mm VR almost daily for about 18months now (initially on a D80 and more recently on a D300) and I've found it to be an absolute joy to use.

I tend to use manual focus whenever possible - particularly for very tiny subjects like your cute little springtail. Despite my initial worries about loss of detail due to diffraction limitation, in practice I found it produces very acceptable results even when shut down to an effective aperture of f/18 or occasionally f/22 when looking for that extra smidgen of dof.

Look forward to seeing more of your pics and am particularly interested in seeing how you get on with your teleconverter.

Bruce

JRsbugs · #15 (**permalink**) 21-02-2009, 07:36 PM

Thanks AM, someone has to keep an eye on the site, I guess it's a fitting memorial to maintain it as long a his wife can.

Hi Bruce! Aha, so you have succumbed to the D300! How do you find that, apart from having more MPs it has a CMOS sensor, they are using that in all their cameras now it seems but it is supposed to be not as good as CCD. I think technology may have moved far enough to improve that as from what I have seen the D300 produces good results. Do you use a teleconverter, I thought you did.

I haven't bothered with manual as yet, but I have found the teleconverter works very well with the 105mm VR, and despite thinking the extra weight would make things more difficult it does the reverse, the weight seems to balance out with the camera nicely. Without it I found it more difficult to get shots without shake, having high magnification at such a close distance. The weight seems to give more stability, it's not just the VR as I notice I can hold the camera more steady. I do have to get back a little further to focus, even without the teleconverter I don't think I could get quite to the minimum foot. I wondered if this had anything to do with the programmes used. I also found I had to move back when taking pics outside at night, the infrared couldn't find the subject due to the lens getting in the way.

I tended to use the 'S' shutter priority most with my old 55-200 lens, the 'P' programme was a little more shaky but good in low light. Now I find 'P' better to use than 'S' with this combo. The camera is pretty good at doing the adjustments for you, so I let it. One day I may try manual and play around with settings but for now it seems to be doing a reasonable job using the advanced programmes. I have taken some shots of other things, woodlouse, 12mm long millipede, tiny spider so will be posting some more, well a lot more I guess!

Janet

Bruce Williams · #16 (**permalink**) 21-02-2009, 08:26 PM

Janet,

I have found the D300 IQ to be noticeably better than the D80. White balance and exposure are more accurate - and more consistent shot-to-shot (useful if you're shooting frames for a stack). Noise levels are lower and the extra pixels are always welcome, particularly if the subject is very small (like your springtails).

I've not tried using live-view in the field but it works well for table-top macro work.

Closest focusing distance for the 105mm VR (on its own) is a little less than 6 inches which is useful as it enables me to brace with my left hand when the subject is on a log, wall or fence.

I haven't got a teleconverter (yet) however I do use the Kenko extension tubes. The 12mm (smallest) tube works well with the on-board flash and is still fine for hand-held shots. Like you I've found shooting in low light to be quite tricky - I need to give a lot more thought to getting the best results when the light is too low to confidently use manual focus.

I invariably use flash and I always use aperture priority as (unless I'm shooting for a stack) I rarely open the shutter larger than f/16 (more generally I shoot at f/18). I've done a LOT of test shots to compare IQ at different apertures and reckon (with my combo) the best IQ is achieved between f/9 and f/13, however as I said previously, even using an effective aperture of f/18 produces very acceptable results - and of course you get that important increase in depth of field.

Bruce

JRsbugs · #17 (**permalink**) 21-02-2009, 08:55 PM

Bruce, thanks, I might upgrade to the D300 if or when I sell more stuff to afford it, and the prices drop again.

I guess an extension tube is cheaper, you have been getting very good results. The minimum shooting distance of the 105mm VR is 6" from lens end, and 12" from the sensor but without measuring it I'm sure I need to be a little further away.

I was using the flash last year more often than not, lack of sun! I do find this lens lets in much more light with better results, all that glass! I took some pics of a fly on the wall today but even with sun it wasn't showing enough detail so I used the flash, but may have been able to adjust the EV a little more if I though I had time, flies fly.

I don't think I will get around to shooting stacks, lol, I like it simple (so far!). The fly pics turned out quite well, I might post some tomorrow as I've used up my allowance.

Depth of field might be worth me trying manual somewhere down the road though, I tend to slip into the easy unless I have to change for different shots.

For low light the 'P' programme works well (more so with the teleconverter), try it, all you set is the ISO but the camera will change that if needs be.

Janet