Have I hit the limit of my camera?

This morning the garden was full of little spiders, waiting patiently in their webs.

This shot was taken with a 350D and EF-S 60mm F/2.8 macro lens using MLU and the 2 sec timer. Settings were f16 @ 1/4 sec and ISO 400. The spider's body was about the size of my little finger nail.

I realise the problems - the slightest breathe of wind makes the little fellows dance madly, with the movement exaggerated by the small DOF, but can I hope for better, or have I reached the limits of my 8mp sensor?

Stuart

You have only started!

This is a hairy critter. What kind of spider is it? You could add a 250D or a tube, couldn't you?

Asher

Asher,

Thanks for taking a look.

The 250d is, AFAIK, only for use on the Powershot series.
Yes, a tube would get me closer.

I have to admit I don't know the species, but there are literally hundreds of them in the garden, so it's nothing unusual. More research needed :<)

My real question however, is "in terms of resolving detail, am I limited by my camera?".

Thanks,

Stuart

---------------------
Edit. A quick Google shows that it's a common garden spider. Obvious really!
The Garden spider is sometimes called the Cross spider because of the white '+' shaped marking on its abdomen.

Hi Stuart,

imho, no. The limitation on the image you have shown are not camera related. The wind, dof, etc. You can get a sharper image, or more detailed, without changing the camera.

Best wishes,

Ray

Hi Stuart,

The limitation of your camera is not that it is 8MP but is rather the pixel size of the sensor. The 350D (and 20D) is "diffraction limited" at about f11, which means that the image will begin to look softer as the aperature gets smaller. I do a lot of macro photography with a 20D, and I find that I can see some softening of very fine detail such as the the hairs on your spider at f16. Sometimes you can get away with it, sometimes not. By f22 it is very noticeable and thus not useable. So in this regard, yes you have reached the limits of your camera.

Fred

It is true what Fred says, but I have to say that you are quite far from the limits of your camera.

Even at this relatively small magnification ratio, the slightest movement will cause blurring. Your image is taken with 1/4 sec, which is probably not fast enough.

A great resource which explains diffraction limited photography can be found here

Fred Tedsen said:

Hi Stuart,

The limitation of your camera is not that it is 8MP but is rather the pixel size of the sensor. The 350D (and 20D) is "diffraction limited" at about f11, which means that the image will begin to look softer as the aperature gets smaller. I do a lot of macro photography with a 20D, and I find that I can see some softening of very fine detail such as the the hairs on your spider at f16. Sometimes you can get away with it, sometimes not. By f22 it is very noticeable and thus not useable. So in this regard, yes you have reached the limits of your camera.

Fred

Click to expand...

Thank you!

I got a 100mm F2.8 macro a while back for my 20D and I've been disappointed with it's sharpness. I've been stopping down to at least F16 for depth of field. I'll have to go try it at wider apertures and see if things don't look better.

I was also puzzling over why the same lens (50mm f1.8 II), with all the same precautions (tripod, MLU, cable release), wouldn't look quite as sharp. I was comparing shots at f22 with my old 300D to newer shots with the 20D, also at f22 (looking for really extensive depth of field).

Thanks for all the advice everyone - much appreciated.

In the knowledge that I could do better with my current equipment, I still think the wind is the biggest factor

I was aware of the diffraction effects, but thought I might get away with it in search of a greater DOF. Obviously not in this case, although maybe on a perfectly still day.

The shuuter speed was slow, because I chose a spider in a sheltered spot but also in shade. A wider aperture would help here but at the expense of DOF. Maybe a bit of fill-in flash would have done the trick.

Plenty of room for experiment then. Back to the garden..............

Thanks again,

Stuart

The vast majority of time, it all involves in how you work with what the elements are giving you and technique.
Macro can be a pain for many, but for the few individuals who work hard at it and apply those proven techniques can achieve the results that they long for.
Keep at it!

In my opinion: No, you are not yet near the limit.

A sturdy tripod, MLU, an electronic cable release are all a good start. The right aperture, manual focus, a moment when the air is perfectly still from breezes and the ground is perfectly still from automobile vibrations, a fast shutter speed (perhaps using off-camera flash with a diffuser)... and you can certainly attain higher resolving power.

Mike

www.mikespinak.com

StuartRae said:

Asher,

The 250d is, AFAIK, only for use on the Powershot series.
Yes, a tube would get me closer.

I have to admit I don't know the species, but there are literally hundreds of them in the garden, so it's nothing unusual. More research needed :<)

My real question however, is "in terms of resolving detail, am I limited by my camera?".

Thanks,

Stuart

Click to expand...

It's great to know the species. Your fascination will increase once you identify it. Also you can return as often as you like with no travel fees!

The 250D and 500 D are compatable with the following Eos lenses:

EF 100mm f/2 USM
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
EF 135mm f/2.8 with Softfocus
EF 135mm f/2L USM
EF 28mm f/2.8
EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 35-80 F/4.0-5.6 USM
EF 35-80mm f/4-5.6 III
EF 35mm f/2
EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM
EF 500mm f/4L IS USM
EF 50mm f/1.8 II
EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro
EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM
EF 600mm f/4L IS USM
EF 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II
EF 85mm f/1.2L USM
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...479&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

It is a great convenient start up the ladder of more magnification without significant loss in resolution.

Unrealized by many, you'll might get about up to 10-20 times loss in resolution in line pair per mm going from a wide aperture to a small one. We talk of a diffraction limit often it occurs about f11 plus or minus for the lenses you might be using.

There's the issue of depth of field which of course is reduced as the aperture is made larger. So one has two effects working in opposite ways.

The website of several of the people who have already replied have a great depth of experience and are worth exploring for pleasure, instruction and inspiration.

At this time, you are not limited by either your lens or by the camera, but by technic and experience.

Here are some pointers based mostly on my experience with photographing shin lesions and tumors in the mouth and so forth with macro lenses.

1. Check the focus in your view finder (if the camera has it), keeping both eyes open looking at the distance and but ignoring everything in the viewfinder except the info of shutter peed, f stop etc. Adjust so that is sharp.

2 . Use a fast shutter speed, at least 1/focal length but usually 1/250 or more if hand held.

3. Choose an f stop of about f 8.0 to start as your initial shots will have greater D.O.F. albeit at lower optical resolution. In the beginning, with less experience, once your shutter speed is fast, you are limited more by finding the plane of focus than by the resolution of (in l.p./mm) of the lens. In practice, you have to sacrifice resolution for depth of foucs.

The flatter the subject, the more you can get away with a larger aperture (but then you need a tripod and a rail and mirror lockup and cable release) and try to take benefit of higher resolution. For practical choices with critters, I'm not the one, look to the details on the pictures in the websites and technics of guys here.

In advanced, (but labor intensive) work, the best resolution (of a 3D object) is obtainable by stacking thin high resolution planes and combining them with special software, but that is another topic.

4. Use a ring light or other flash.

5. Focus manually and then final focus by movement in and out. Take many shots. A few might be perfect and blow you away.

6. Practice with the current lens until you are amazed,

7. then add a superb 250 D (just $71.95) and start again.

8. then consider a 100mm Macro (which has great magnification but decreased DOF but is a wonderful lens!

Hope this helps,

Asher

Asher (and others),

Thanks a lot for your detailed reply. Your time is much appreciated.

Apologies for the confusion about the 250D - I'd only ever seen it mentioned in connection with the Powershot series. For the money it certainly looks a good buy. I assume it will drop the 'speed' of the lens to something like f/4?

The website of several of the people who have already replied have a great depth of experience and are worth exploring for pleasure, instruction and inspiration.

Click to expand...

Yes, I've already visited, enjoyed and learned from them, especially Michael's.

At this time, you are not limited by either your lens or by the camera, but by technic and experience.

Click to expand...

That's good. Learning and practice are free and require only time, which I have lots of. We all hope to improve........

I think I shall struggle with the trade-off between sharpness and DOF for a while. Macro photography certainly concentrates the mind.

Stuart (face-down in the garden, talking to the spiders)

Erik DeBill said:

stopping down to at least F16 for depth of field.

Click to expand...

For macro work my Canon 100mm macro hardly beats my old Nikon 950 - the reason being DOF. Sometimes there's something to be said for a small sensor.

- DL

Hi Stuart. It's Steve here.

A bit of an old post, but just thought I'd let you know. I think it is a Garden Cross Spider. We had loads too!

StuartRae said:

Apologies for the confusion about the 250D - I'd only ever seen it mentioned in connection with the Powershot series. For the money it certainly looks a good buy. I assume it will drop the 'speed' of the lens to something like f/4?

Click to expand...

Hi Stuart,

I just saw this comment and wanted to note that is is incorrect. The 250D and other dioptric correction lenses for cameras allow you to focus closer by making the lens near sighted and sacrificing infinity focus. With strong correction you may lose focus at one meter but be able to get very close to your subject.

The light loss from these filters is mild and they in do not change your aperture or focal length. What cheap ones will do is induce optical distortions which will reduce IQ.

enjoy,

Sean

Sean,

Thanks for pointing that out.

I have in fact bought a 250D and first impressions are very favourable, although I've not had much chance to 'play' with it yet.

Stuart

Try a flash

Hi,
I've spent some time shooting spiders but by no means am an expert. I can tell you that a flash will not bother them much but pushing the lens up close can cause them to run for safety. Try a longer lens if possible to get closer and use a flash to enable a faster shutter. I can't imagine getting a spider in a web in sharp focus at 1/4 second especially if there is any wind at all. Additionally I wouldn't think you would need to shoot at f/16 either unless you are using a diopter which shortens depth of field along with focusing distances. But I'll bet the flash and faster shutter will help you the most. If you don't want to buy a flash you can brighten the spider by using something to reflect more light onto it like big pieces of white cardboard, foam core or purchased light reflectors.
Eric

and, as dumb question, why not a piece of cardboard to be used as a windshield to stop wind?

Thanks for the post, there was some good information that came from it. Aside from the sharpness issues which have been thoughtfully discussed, I couldn't help but feel that there were also some contrast and color issues as well. So I copied the image into PS3 and started playing around. That's when I noticed the dark splotches in the background.

What are those dark spots?

Sensor-dust! So you need to clean your sensor. Quite easy to do yourself, if you get the right stuff.
I use Digi-pads and Eclipse for wet cleaning, when it's really dirty, and inbetween, I use a Arctic Butterfly for dry cleaning.

Jörgen

Jorgen,

I was also a bit concerned, but I don't think it's sensor dust. I've not had it on any shots before or since. The background is a brown wheelie-bin on which the spider had spun it's web, and as far as I can tell the dark spots are small objects stuck to the bin.

Tim,

As you can see from the above, a brown spider against a brown wheelie-bin doesn't have great contrast.

Thanks everyone for the advice.

Regards,

Stuart

Sorry but you're wrong Stuart, these are dust on sensor! I'm ready to bet about that!`

You get them when you change of lens, so it comes suddenly.
But you can only see those spots when at ƒ16 or worth at ƒ22

If you want to check, go outside point the sky with your camera set at ƒ22, focus on infinity (manual if needed) and shoot a clear area, then open your file in PS and do an auto level... scary!

But easy to clean after some trials if you follow the good infos already given by Jörgen Nyberg.

Good luck!

Now
once sensor is cleaned, do the following to minimize dust on sensor:
when changing lens:
shutdown your camera to lessen static electricity
have your body facing down all the time when changing lens
don't leave your body "open"

Hope it helps

Jorgen and Nicolas,

You're quite tight of course. I just did the test at f22. I only have about a dozen spots which are clearly visible, and as I said it's not bothered me before or since.
When my hands have steadied down after the seasonal excesses I'll have a go at cleaning.

BTW, I had an idea of carrying a large, clear plastic bag with me and changing the lens inside that. Any thoughts?

Stuart

"I had an idea of carrying a large, clear plastic bag with me and changing the lens inside that."

That works. (Even for film cameras when wandering around an abandoned cement plant in a breeze)

That's a very nice spider. I have several people at work I'll volunteer as food when it gets hungry.

Stuart, consider using flash if the light is a little low. I have 430EX with a "off camera shoe cord 2", and that makes the flash quite useful. Example (overcast day, in a bush):



Jörgen

Jörgen Nyberg said:

Stuart, consider using flash if the light is a little low. I have 430EX with a "off camera shoe cord 2", and that makes the flash quite useful. Example (overcast day, in a bush):
Jörgen

Click to expand...

And the lens is.................................

Asher

StuartRae said:

BTW, I had an idea of carrying a large, clear plastic bag with me and changing the lens inside that. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Get a dust free bag!

Asher Kelman said:

And the lens is.................................

Asher

Click to expand...

..............EF-S60mm

Another benefit if using flash with macro, if the background is some distance away, you black it out.

And the little butterfly is about an inch in lenght. If I got it right, it's an Silver Studded Blue.

Jörgen

Well, it's a pity Jörgen that we can't use that lens on a 1DsII or hte 5D!~


Asher