Ideally you want a shutter speed that is at least as fast as the focal length of the lens - so if you're using a 100mm lens a shutter speed of 1/125s or faster is needed to prevent camera shake when shooting handheld. But this is only a rule of thumb and with some practice you might find you can get away with a slower speed. It is very easy to get excited when, after hours of waiting and stalking, your subject is finally in the viewfinder. Keeping calm and relaxed will make a big difference.

Of course there are times when the subject needs a faster shutter speed - insects in flight for example.

And of course there are times when you cannot get close, as with this water lilly
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...php?photo=1445.

Canon 10D + Sigma 50-500mm, focal length 313mm.

Harry

I have had a go at taking macro shots of a wasp, had to be quick as it was waking up, it was in the logs for the fire. What I noticed when taking the photo's just with straight flash of the camera. The wider the aperture, less depth of field better sharpness, fully closed down to f22 image started to become soft even though it has better depth is this because its an old lens and doesn't have the quality. The example are below.

Edit. this wasp was nearly 1" probably a queen overwintering

Christine

As you stop a lens down an effect know as diffraction starts to kick in which affects the lens sharpness. This typically starts to be seen from f16 onwards. So lens that stop down to f32 maybe have great DOF at the cost of image sharpness.

Rob, I don't think this is a problem with the better modern lenses, most of my indoor controlled macros are taken at f/32. Canon 100mm macro

Example of rose shot f/32


Harry

Looks like Christine with have to find smaller wasps or fork out for a better lens ;)

Harry it would be interesting to see at which f stop this lens is sharpest at.

Changing the subject slightly but can the experts tell me the difference between the 'focusing distance' and the 'working distance' when using an extention tube.
As an example I have seen a table that uses a 12mm tube and an 50mm 1.8 lens that gives a focusing distance of 249-324mm and a working distance of 156-239mm- how are these figures arraived at.

Christine,

Faced with a wasp 1" long I would be very quick. I think you've done remarkably well in the circumstances. I have just compared the image of dead wasp in post #9 with this. The use of flash has certainly lifted the subject.
How come you did not post this here http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...=500&ppuser=57

Fancy pants. :)
As Brucie used to say ......... Didn't you do well.

The kit used is shown in post #11 and the cost in #13. My guess that the lens is a Domiplan from Meyer Optic. As this is a vintage East German lens its performance cannot be compared to modern day lenses.

If you were looking for a low cost upgrade then Pentax Takumar lenses would give improved performance. An old 135mm would give greater lens to supject distance.

Don

Don. Glad you like the one I posted of the head shot in the macro section, you are a good teacher thank you. I was just hoping it didn't take off towards me while I was so close with the macro. The wasp was lethargic but waking up very fast, it was flexing its wings.

Christine

Hi Roy,

I thought this may be easy. 12mm tube and 50mm and tape measure I have so.........

With lens set at nearest focus 0.45m end of lens to in focus point ( lens to subject distance ) 125mm.
With lens set to infinity end of lens to point in focus ( lens to subject distance ) 190mm.

At the start of the tape focus 0.45mm to infinity ( focusing distance ? ) 65mm.

I now don't understand the numbers in the quote. :confused:

Don