Hopper on pyrethrum flower

Earlier images, not yet re-categorized. All subject types. Not for new images.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

MacroLuv
Posts: 1964
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:36 pm
Location: Croatia

Hopper on pyrethrum flower

Post by MacroLuv »

Actually on Chrysanthemum cinerariifolium. Also called the Dalmatian chrysanthemum. :D
Pyrethrum is also the name of a natural insecticide made from the dried flower heads of C. cinerariifolium. Active components called Pyrethrins attack the nervous systems of all insects, and inhibit female mosquitoes from biting. When not present in amounts fatal to insects, they still appear to have an insect repellent effect. 8)
Seems this guy is immune. :lol:

Not bad for ISO 400. What you think? :-k

Image

Model Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Date/time original 06.06.2007 18:05:11
Shutter speed value 1/400 s
Aperture value f/9
ISO speed ratings ISO 400
Focal length 100 mm

Image

Model Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Date/time original 06.06.2007 18:05:19
Shutter speed value 1/400 s
Aperture value f/9
ISO speed ratings ISO 400
Focal length 100 mm

Image

Model Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Date/time original 06.06.2007 18:05:44
Shutter speed value 1/320 s
Aperture value f/9
ISO speed ratings ISO 400
Focal length 100 mm
The meaning of beauty is in sharing with others.

P.S.
Noticing of my "a" and "the" and other grammar
errors are welcome. :D

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23764
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Re: Hopper on pyrethrum flower

Post by rjlittlefield »

MacroLuv wrote:Not bad for ISO 400. What you think? :-k
This looks fine at web resolution. Back in the "good old days" of film, we would have gushed over how fine and tight the grain structure looks. Every time I rummage through old 35mm stuff, I come away impressed by how far the technology has come!

BTW, if you're comparing between sensor sizes, be aware that ISO ratings are actively misleading. It takes about the same amount of light to expose your DSLR at ISO 400 as it does a typical P&S at ISO 64. The DSLR sensor gets credit for a higher ISO rating because it's responding to light that has been spread out over a larger area, and hence is less bright. But the total amount of light is the same, which means same noise at same exposure time, same DOF, and same lighting level.

The big advantage of large sensors is that they are able to capture more light than small sensors. They have less noise only when they are allowed to do that. To actually get less noise on a DSLR (compared to a small sensor P&S), you need to set the DSLR's ISO rating down low and haul out the flash, open the aperture, or lengthen the shutter time. The resulting exposure would produce a blown-out image on a P&S because its sensor's small pixel wells couldn't hold enough electrons. But the large sensor can hold them all without overflowing, and the larger numbers give less noise.

--Rik

Ken Ramos
Posts: 7208
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 2:12 pm
Location: lat=35.4005&lon=-81.9841

Post by Ken Ramos »

Well all the afore mentioned explains a few things. Sometimes I can get away with ISO 400 or even 800 once in a great while but normally I like the grain (noise) of ISO 100, though it is not quite like Kodachrome :-k Anyway some nice shots there Nikola, interesting stuff about the Pyrethrins by the way. :D

cactuspic
Posts: 437
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

Post by cactuspic »

Nice series, Nikola. Was the hopper actually munching or was he just perched? Have a great New Year.

Irwin

Rik, You raised some interesting ideas that I would like to pursue in the technical forum after I cook dinner.

Irwin

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic