Am I in the right forum here?

[petermcwerner]

Hi,

I see some wonderful pictures here. One of my interests is orchids and I also have created 2 orchid web sites,

The Angraecum Encyclopedia and
Cuban Orchids

My doubts arise from the fact that my pictures in general are not of such small objects as insects and I am wondering where the limit to "macro" is. I shall start with a few examples.

Here is one of my setups with the results. The lens is a Kern Yvar 75mm/2.5 used with a set of extension tubes on the Panasonic Lumix G1, which in turn was fixed to a 4 way focusing rail on a tripod. Available light from the nearby window. The subject is an inflorescence of Oncidium Twinkle Twinkle Little Star orchid. Each flower has an actual width of 12mm. All G1 pictures at ISO=100, raws developed in RAW Therapee, re-sized with gimp. The setup was taken with a Micro Nikkor 105mm/2.8 on a D700 and in-camera flash


Kern Bolex 75mm/2.5 on G1 with extension rings and focusing rail


One inflorescence using the 10+25mm rings. On my screen the flowers are about 5 times life size


Kern Yvar 75mm/2.5 with 10mm+50mm extension rings. 2 sec @ f/22. As I already mentioned, the actual width of the flower is 12mm. On my screen it looks about 15 times lifesize

Here some more pictures:


Encyclia brevifolia orchid - 90mm/2.5 Angenieux Alfitar on G1 - ISO=100 1/160s @ f/2.5 - RAW Therapee + gimp


Encyclia brevifolia orchid - Leica Macro Elmarit 60mm/2.8 on G1 - ISO=100 1/3s @ f/11 - RAW Therapee + gimp


I am looking forward and welcome your comments.
Cheers
Peter

BTW, the [center] ... [/center] code does not seem to work. What am I doing wrong?

[Cactusdave]

Very nice. The Kern is obviously a good glass. Presumably a C-mount cine lens in origin. I have noticed that C-mount to micro 4/3rds adapters are readily available. Presumably the smaller sensor works well with these lenses. The macro Elmarit is also working well with your G1.

[petermcwerner]

Very nice.

Thank you.

The Kern is obviously a good glass. Presumably a C-mount cine lens in origin. I have noticed that C-mount to micro 4/3rds adapters are readily available. Presumably the smaller sensor works well with these lenses

The limit is about 25mm. Only a few 25mm C-mount lenses cover the whole m4/3 sensor without vignetting and/or smearing. 50mm or longer lenses usually work well.



This shot with a 20mm/1.5 SOM Berthiot had to be cropped, but sharpness and color rendition of some C-mount lenses are superb.

[rjlittlefield]

Peter,

Welcome aboard!

My doubts arise from the fact that my pictures in general are not of such small objects as insects and I am wondering where the limit to "macro" is.

There is no hard-and-fast rule about what's acceptable. It's one of those "subjective judgment of the officials" deals, ultimately determined by discussion within the admin group when presented with specific images.

One description that I've written previously is that "generally we've seen [the boundary] someplace around 6" frame width and no cute babies."

I might add that familiar subjects like birds, mammals, and flowers are a bit like cute babies in this regard. Given otherwise identical images involving a small hummingbird and a large sphinx moth, the picture of the hummingbird will require more magnification / smaller frame width to be acceptable. The driver for this is not technical; it has more to do with distinguishing this site from the many others that solicit bird, mammal, and flower shots.

Subjects become progressively more appropriate as they get smaller.

As only one admin, I think your first two orchids are clearly appropriate, with the second preferred. I can't tell about the latter two, since I'm not familiar with that orchid and I can't tell from the equipment description how big they must be. The bunch of grapes in your last image would be questionable as a main image of a topic; we'd rather have you narrow in on just a few of them. It could be OK as a supporting image if needed to establish context.

BTW, the [center] ... [/center] code does not seem to work. What am I doing wrong?

That's a new question! It looks to me that the phpBB2 software we're using does not support [center].

And now I have a question for you. You're using a Panasonic Lumix G1 with extension tubes. We have another member who is interested in this combination. What kind of tubes and what adapters are you using?

By the way, your photos are high quality. They're definitely appropriate for the regular galleries, such as Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up.

--Rik

Edit: added a qualifier, "as a main image of a topic..."

[Aynia]

Your orchids are beautiful!

[petermcwerner]

Your orchids are beautiful! :)

Thank you, Aynia

Cheers from Lake Geneva in Switzerland
Peter

[petermcwerner]

By the way, your photos are high quality. They're definitely appropriate for the regular galleries, such as Technical and Studio Photography -- Macro and Close-up.

Thank you for your kind reception and explanations, Rik,

And now I have a question for you. You're using a Panasonic Lumix G1 with extension tubes. We have another member who is interested in this combination. What kind of tubes and what adapters are you using?

I would suggest to create a new thread, something like Macros with the Lumix G1 in another sub-forum, as there are many possibilities. The G1 (and m4/3 in general) are very flexible in using different lenses and accessories via adapters. It was one important reason for me to choose this platform in order to re-use my Alpa Reflex, Leica M + R, Nikon, M42, Exakta and C-mount glass that had been sometimes sleeping for years. Also, I like the color rendition of the G1 very much when photographing flowers. None other of my previous cameras except the R9+DMR achieved the same sort of color fidelity.

In which sub-forum would you suggest to initiate such a thread?

Let me finish with another picture I took this summer in Cuba. I do not know if it can be defined a macro, nor is it photographically very accomplished, but I think the subject interesting.

A frog only recently discovered in a mountainous region of the Humboldt Natural Reserve in Eastern Cuba may be the smallest in the world. Specimens have been found that are only 8.5 millimeters long. It is considered Critically Endangered by the IUCN and is found in only 2 small areas on Cuba.



Eleutherodactylus iberia (Monte Iberia Eleuth)
Alpa-Kern Macro Switar 50mm/1.9 on G1 - ISO=100 - 1/500

[rjlittlefield]

In which sub-forum would you suggest to initiate such a thread?

Equipment Discussions. Many thanks!

--Rik

[thartl]

Speaking of equipment discussions - I have been using my rails opposite direction of how yours are facing in the pictures. I figured putting the screw knobs closer to me was the right way? Is there a right or a wrong way to face them? They don't extend past my lens the way they are.

[Aynia]

Crikey. Would you just look at the size of that frog!!

It's amazing. Lucky you!

[rjlittlefield]

Speaking of equipment discussions - I have been using my rails opposite direction of how yours are facing in the pictures. I figured putting the screw knobs closer to me was the right way? Is there a right or a wrong way to face them? They don't extend past my lens the way they are.

They're just mechanics. Whichever way fits best is fine. Completely different from lenses, where the image quality degrades when you get them the wrong way forward.

--Rik

[DaveW]

Your sure it's a small frog and not that you have just got very big fingers Peter?

DaveW

[petermcwerner]

Your sure it's a small frog and not that you have just got very big fingers Peter? :lol:

DaveW :D

Dave, the fingers are those of our guide, mine were busy photographing the frog, he is really small, less than 1cm long

Cheers
Peter

[homestar455]

Welcome Peter.

Nice photos, I like that last orchid.

Wow, that's a small frog. I've seen ants bigger than that. lol

[petermcwerner]

Welcome Peter. Nice photos, I like that last orchid

Thanks

Wow, that's a small frog. I've seen ants bigger than that. lol

And they jump like big ones. They hide under dead leaves near a river and are difficult to find unless you know where to look for them. This one staid quietly on the finger of the guide to be photographed, like a professional model. Must have been a female

Cheers
Peter