Canon 400D

[Rossco]

Hello all

I've got a Canon 400D and a canon 60mm macro lens; however, I was thinking about upgrading the camera body in favour of a 450D as this has a built in image stabilizer doesn't it?

Probably the best pic I've taken with this equipment is below. Try as I might, I can never quite get the images pin-sharp with a good depth of field. Do you think it would be worth getting a new camera body, or should I just keep playing around with the 400D? By the way, I have no issues with the macro lens - it's very good, but I feel as though some image stabilization somewhere in the mix would be a good thing.

Thoughts and advice appreciated.

Ross

[ron1863]

Canon don't do in-body stabilisation, only in their lenses. Sony and Olympus are two manufacturers who stabilise images in-body.

[madukan]

That's a fine image

I think you have the wrong information about the 450D though, it doesn't have built in IS. Nor does any Canon dslr that I've heard of.

Canon chose to have the IS in it's lens range and have recently added a macro with IS

I don't know prices yet but it won't be cheap

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM - Canon UK

Canon EF 100mm F2.8L USM Macro with Hybrid IS: Digital Photography Review

[Mike Jackson]

i think the new 100 macro with IS is somewhere around the £800 mark. The problem with IS and taking pictures of insects is that it will keep the lens elements steady for longer shots but you have still got to contend with wind movement and the insects moving.

To get a good depth of field you need a narrow aperture. I use a maximum aperture of f/16 for insect photography and quite often f/20. This gives a good depth of field but means the exposure is far too long to hand hold. A tripod would overcome this but you then have the movement problem again so I use a Sigma ring flash and manually set the exposure to 1/125 at ISO 400. This combination gives a good depth of field with a nice sharp image.

[Boddie]

Originally Posted by Rossco

Hello all

I've got a Canon 400D and a canon 60mm macro lens; however, I was thinking about upgrading the camera body in favour of a 450D as this has a built in image stabilizer doesn't it?

Probably the best pic I've taken with this equipment is below. Try as I might, I can never quite get the images pin-sharp with a good depth of field. Do you think it would be worth getting a new camera body, or should I just keep playing around with the 400D? By the way, I have no issues with the macro lens - it's very good, but I feel as though some image stabilization somewhere in the mix would be a good thing.

Thoughts and advice appreciated.

Ross

Sorry to critcise your image but in my opinion it really does look poor given the body you own. What exactly is the 60mm macro lens you are using?

I can see no EXIF data so can't check your settings.

This image almost looks as if you have breeched the minimum focal range for the lens.

The image aslo looks bright enough to have given you a fast enough shutter speed in APERTURE PRIORITY setting.

Perhaps to give us a better idea you could set your sytem up on a tripod and take a picture of a pencil tip, for example, focussing on where the lead meets the wood.

Try to fill as much of the frame as possible but make sure it is within the focal range of the lens.

Cheers

Andrew

[Rossco]

Thanks for the advice folks.

Andrew, below is the data from that shot I posted.

The macro lens I have is this one:

Canon EF-S 60mm f2 8 Macro USM

I also have a Marumi ring-flash.

Andrew, if you have a chance, please take a look at the photos I have on my picasa album and let me know which one looks best from a technical point of view - a sort of benchmarking exercise. The photo I posted initially appeals to me because of the composition and the colours.

Thanks all for your help

Ross

[Boddie]

So you have a great body, a super lens and the settings seem fine, for the distance at which you shot from, looking at the size of the image within the frame but none of the image seems to be in focus.

How can I find your picasa album?

[ChrisR]

Hi Ross

My first reaction is that f5.0 sounds a very wide aperture, considering you are using a flash to supplement the daylight. In this case though I think the daylight was strong enough (at f5.0 and 1/160th second) that the flash hasn't had much of an impact on the photo, leaving the insect movement to create slight blurring from the daylight component of the lighting. Flash will freeze an image when the flash is the major component because, although the camera might be set at a 160th the flash will give an effective shutter speed much much faster than that ... as long as no other 'permanently on' light source (eg. the sun) illuminates the subject.

My suggestion would be to use f11 or smaller when taking photos in daylight so that if the flash didn't fire the photo would be massively under exposed. Then when the flash does fire it will be the major lighting source and the effect will be to freeze the subject. You will get a much better depth of focus too, as a side effect, though your overall sharpness will (apparently) suffer

[Boddie]

Whilst I'd agree that f5.0 is far from ideal I'd still expect part of the image to be sharp?

[ChrisR]

Originally Posted by Boddie

Whilst I'd agree that f5.0 is far from ideal I'd still expect part of the image to be sharp?

There is a piece of the Figwort flower that seems fairly sharp, along the front ... but I think the combination of F5.0, ISO200 & 1/160th in sunlight has just let the wasp move a bit too much. I would certainly use a lower ISO too - like ISO100 or ISO80. Not for the grain - but to require more light and let the flash dominate more.