Macro settings for Sigma 150

[Ollie]

Originally Posted by pressld2

Nick and I are both using Nikon D300s whereas Roger and Graham are both using Canons.

Dave P.

Interesting point that Dave. I cant say as I have ever compared my shots at the different aperture settings having always been satisfied with the sharpness at f16. However next time I go out I will take some of the same subject at f11 and f16 to compare at full size.

[Geoff F]

I use the 180 mm for extra working distance, but otherwise I use similar settings to those already mentioned. F14 is, I find, a good compromise setting; but you do need to be aware of ISO and shutter speed for 'real time' insects.

With the longer lens, a tripod is essential. But even with it, I find that I usually need a decent shutter speed to allow for wind movement of the subject. Around 1/200 minimum seems to work fine.

Above ISO 400 some background noise will probably be quite noticeable and even at ISO 400 it can be a problem under some lighting conditions.

Good natural light is the easiest, when available, but flash certainly helps to overcome poor light conditions. Providing you can work with it in dense undergrowth and obtain good correctly exposed images.

I tend to find a standard external flash on the hot shoe is simplest. If using the basic pop up camera flash it often helps to remove the lens hood which prevents shadow area problems.

Macro flashing, in real life, can be a bit hit or miss when chasing insects and your lighting requirements keep changing.

When this appears likely to cause problems I normally prefer to work with manual settings and adjust the flash output to suit.

For insects, I find that suitable settings around 1/200, F 14, ISO 200 work well with an external flash. But everything will vary depending on the circumstances and the flash output needs frequent compensation. It is very different from general flash photography settings.

But to return to the original question.

In my experience, adding a converter will cause quite a bit of light loss with narrow apertures, besides some inevitable loss of quality, so I would definitely use a tripod unless you can be sure of sufficient shutter speed and lens stability.

I do have a 1.4x converter for my 180 lens but have found that it often causes more problems than it solves so I rarely use it.

[glsammy]

I forgot to say that I pretty well always use a Kenko pro 300 1.4X TC with my 150mm. I find the quality I get to be excellent. My normal settings would be 1/250sec F16.0 ISO 400. If there's loads of good light I'll drop the ISO down.
I leave my flash on ETTL.
As I almost always use flash I never use a tripod but I do use a monopod. I can hand hold when using flash but using the monopod is so easy why take the risk?

[Gaza]

I now get the shots that I want using a combination of a 105mm ( Haven't got the 150mm yet ) + x1.4 teleconverter + 20mm extension tube + Ring flash.

Always the same settings 1/200th Iso 400 f.14 Manual.
Because I get good shots, at these settings, I have been happy. But must try different f/stops

[DrNickBurton]

"And could the camera make a difference? "


Absolutely, my understanding is it's to do with the camera, not the lens.

A camera with higher pixel density will resolve the softness produced by diffraction better, so the effect is more noticeable in pictures taken with cameras having higher pixel densities. A D300 becomes diffraction limited at roughly f/11-13 I think, but something like a D700 (which also has 12MP, but in a sensor over twice the size) should be able to go to a higher f-stop without seeing any softness.

[Wizmatt]

One thing I think is worth mentioning is that depth of field becomes narrower the closer you are to your subject. If you are shooting large subjects such as dragnflies or butterflies you will not have to be as close to fill the frame. In these circumstances I have found that you can use apetures such as f8 (or lower providing it is paralelle to the sensor). However if you are shooting very close to the subject, depth of field is more restricted and a smaller apeture is needed. I find it useful to use the depth of field button when looking through the viewfinder as it is hard to judge what will be in focus (the subject and background).

[matt_xyz]

one point not mentioned (unless I missed it ) is that the increased DOF provided by smaller apertures obviously results in increasingly messy backgrounds. So, unless there is a large distance between the subject and the background (not always possible) I will try to use as large an aperture as possible by getting the lens parallel to the subject. I will rarely go smaller than f11 and often use f8 or 9. In the past I've used f5 or 6.3 on damselflies or butterflies with their wings folded up, in order to get a cleaner background. If the subject is very flat and the lens is completely parallel this will often be possible.

By way of example, this one was taken at f6.3:


and this one at f4;




Matt