Here are three... pics - since that's all I can upload at once. Click on the link below to see them in my blog... lots and lots of them, but not half as nice as many photos here on this forum.
First two here - it was still way up in the corner.
He'd moved down and into the daylight here.
http://magicsnowflakes.vox.com/library/ ... hosis.html
The new butterfly for Ken
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Thank you for the butterfly Aynia Butterflies seem to be mostly wings anyway but this one has such a tiny abdomen, making the wings look huge for its size. The last photo is much better Aynia and the background is nice. In the first two, however, it seem you focused more on the wings and who wouldn't but the head is out of focus. If you can, try stopping down the lens a bit more and use a diffused flash for filling in. If you are using a built in flash, a couple of pieces of "frosted Scotch Tape" over the lens of the built in flash makes a fairly good diffuser.
I think the last one is much better because I got a better angle as he'd moved from the top corner under the eaves and overhang. I couldn't look through the view finder properly or even position the camera and my head was periliously close to spiders. (real or imagined...!!!! ).
I've checked the settings and the first one is f20 (!!) and the second is F22. My camera only does F22 and not any smaller. It also only has 3 focus areas/points (and the reviewers always say this is a big drawback) which I do change from time to time depending on orientation and where the eyes are. I think I read somewhere that if the camera is parallel to the subject, you get a better/sharper result. Perhaps that's where I went astray!
Third pic is only f5.6!
Never thought of frosted scotch tape as a diffuser. I shall try it and see how it goes.
I've checked the settings and the first one is f20 (!!) and the second is F22. My camera only does F22 and not any smaller. It also only has 3 focus areas/points (and the reviewers always say this is a big drawback) which I do change from time to time depending on orientation and where the eyes are. I think I read somewhere that if the camera is parallel to the subject, you get a better/sharper result. Perhaps that's where I went astray!
Third pic is only f5.6!
Never thought of frosted scotch tape as a diffuser. I shall try it and see how it goes.
I too sympathize with you on the spider thing! I have nine AF points but do not use them, though I do use the center point for focus conformation. However, I do not rely on that point in most situations. Normally if it looks sharp through the viewfinder then it is sharp and I take the photo, though sometimes the AF conformation and my eyes do agree and it beeps and lights up. I always use manual focus, seeing as how AF rarely sees things the way the human eye does, well at least in my experience for what ever its worth. I think you are right about the angle at which the photograph is taken but someone once told me to always focus on the eye or eyes, so I do and let the aperature setting hopefully take care of the rest.
Ignore autofocus close up Aynia it is unreliable. Switch your lens to manual focus and screen focus just as you would in the days of fully manual cameras. Also ignore focus confirmation lights and rely on your eyes on the screen because the focus confirmation light is simply linked to the autofocus sensor, so if autofocus is unreliable close up so will be the focus confirmation light.
In ultra close up's the depth of field is too small to cover any small inaccuracies in autofocus, which in conventional photography would not be noticed.
I now use manual focus and Shutter Priority set to the lowest hand holding speed for the lens in question when hand holding in available light, and Aperture Priority set to a small f-stop when on a tripod or using flash. No real need now for fully manual as you are either having to prioritise either shutter speeds or aperture and let the other variable take care of itself.
DaveW
In ultra close up's the depth of field is too small to cover any small inaccuracies in autofocus, which in conventional photography would not be noticed.
I now use manual focus and Shutter Priority set to the lowest hand holding speed for the lens in question when hand holding in available light, and Aperture Priority set to a small f-stop when on a tripod or using flash. No real need now for fully manual as you are either having to prioritise either shutter speeds or aperture and let the other variable take care of itself.
DaveW
Dave and Ken, I think you've hit the nail on the head. I was indeed using autofocus in this instance. The other thing is, I might have moved slightly before hitting the shutter... I will never know.
I do sometimes use manual focus, but more with things I have to creep up on.
I will definitely use manual more and see if the photos improve.
Thanks for the tips.
Just to add, I would use autofocus with butterflies with the camera held out straight infront of me... and not looking in the viewfinder (obviously) because some of them are just that bit flighty. I think I need to bribe them more with nectar and stuff.
This butterfly wasn't acting normally so I should have changed to manual focus, but the thought never occured to me.
I do sometimes use manual focus, but more with things I have to creep up on.
I will definitely use manual more and see if the photos improve.
Thanks for the tips.
Just to add, I would use autofocus with butterflies with the camera held out straight infront of me... and not looking in the viewfinder (obviously) because some of them are just that bit flighty. I think I need to bribe them more with nectar and stuff.
This butterfly wasn't acting normally so I should have changed to manual focus, but the thought never occured to me.