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.

[Rossco]

Thanks again

Here are the Picasa albums:

Picasa Web Albums - Bambos

The vast majority of these were taken with the same set-up; however, the ring-flash was only used on a few of them.

Take a look and let me know what you think.

Ross

[Rossco]

Originally Posted by 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

Ta, Chris.

[Ukwildlifeo]

Originally Posted by ron1863

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

Dont forget Pentax and Panasonic - in fact it seems only the 'big two' seem to not offer it!

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by Ukwildlifeo

Dont forget Pentax and Panasonic - in fact it seems only the 'big two' seem to not offer it!

I think they became committed to lens stabilisation back in the film days and would find it difficult to change now.

Jim

[ron1863]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

I think they became committed to lens stabilisation back in the film days and would find it difficult to change now.

Jim

and not as lucrative in terms of income

[ron1863]

Originally Posted by Rossco

Thanks again

Here are the Picasa albums:

Picasa Web Albums - Bambos

The vast majority of these were taken with the same set-up; however, the ring-flash was only used on a few of them.

Take a look and let me know what you think.

Ross

Hi Ross,

I had a look at your macro shots and it looks to me as if you are using an aperture from f2.8 - f5.6, which will give you a very narrow depth of field, therefore only a part of your subject is in focus. To get all of your subject in focus, especially with a macro lens try f11 to f22, and you may need a tripod or use a high ISO.

[Rossco]

Thanks, Ron. Very useful. What's the optimum ISO to use on a bright day if you're using a ring-flash?

Thanks for your help.

Ross

[glsammy]

As Ron has said, you need to alter your exposure settings.
I mostly use flash with my macro shots, whatever the weather. This is to allow me to use F16.0 most of the time. I also set the shutter speed to 1/250sec. Your ISO can be whatever you like, the flash should compensate as necessary. I tend to leave mine on ISO 400, although if it's a really brightly lit natural subject I may well go down to ISO 100, you can always check after each shot to see what difference altering it makes.
I also tend to use manual focus so that I can choose which part of the subject is in focus, rather than just the central part.

[ChrisR]

Originally Posted by Rossco

What's the optimum ISO to use on a bright day if you're using a ring-flash?

You really need to use some trial & error - it's very hard to work out because the resulting exposure will depend on the ISO, the lens, the aperture, the shutter speed & the distance to the subject.

ISO just controls the sensitivity of the sensor but the trade-off is that the faster you set it, the grainier your photos will look - so a slower ISO will give you a better quality image but needs more light. In natural light you might have to use a higher ISO to compensate for low light conditions but if you are providing your own light (a flash) and you are close to the subject then there's no reason why you shouldn't set a low ISO and get a better quality image.

I raised the issue because in your example photo it looks like the aperture is a bit wide and the flash isn't dominating the lighting so it has allowed a little movement to create some blur on the image. If you drop the ISO down to 100 or 80 then the sensor will need more light to make a proper exposure and if you use a small aperture (eg. f11 to f22) this will again reduce the amount of light getting to the sensor ... thus reducing the influence of the sunlight and allowing the flash to have some freezing effect on the photo

But just try out a few things and see what works best for you