Macro Photography.

RBeckom

True macro photography is defined as life sized or larger. This in short means that the image on the camera sensor is the same size or even magnified to larger than life. I enjoy taking photos of small images and then increase they're size as far as possible. Macro. Does any one else share in this interest? I'd love to see your photos.

RBeckom

RBeckom

Macro can be of anything. As long as it's small or A part there of.

ENFIDL

I really want to get into macro photography but d@mn those lenses are expensive lol

ENFIDL

And great shots brother!

danielzreyes

ENFIDL:

I really want to get into macro photography but d@mn those lenses are expensive lol

+1

RBeckom

ENFIDL:

I really want to get into macro photography but d@mn those lenses are expensive lol

Today's digital cameras can work magic as far as macro goes. Most come with A built in macro setting. Most of my macro work done to date is with A simple Kodak C-190 that cost A whopping seventy-five dollars. I later purchased A Kodak Z-981 with twenty-five power zoom. The bigger camera does as well as the C-190 but no better. The only advantage is the ease of use with the manual settings instead of using the auto-focus settings. Photography doesn't have to cost A big initial investment. As I develop my hobby I plan to expand into the DSLR field at A later date.

ENFIDL

I shoot with a DSLR so I'd have to get a lens to do it. I honestly wouldn't use a different camera since I have a DSLR so that'd just be X amount of money to put towards the lens instead

RBeckom

ENFIDL:

I shoot with a DSLR so I'd have to get a lens to do it. I honestly wouldn't use a different camera since I have a DSLR so that'd just be X amount of money to put towards the lens instead

I can see your point. From time to time I run across good deals on used lenses. I'll keep you in mind if your interested.

jimmyv723

ENFIDL:

I shoot with a DSLR so I'd have to get a lens to do it. I honestly wouldn't use a different camera since I have a DSLR so that'd just be X amount of money to put towards the lens instead

What camera do you use? I have a Canon T2i and I picked up a Sigma EX 50mm Macro lens on Ebay and it was under $200 shipped. They go for over $350 new and this one was in like new condition. I know a lot of people frown on third party lenses and components but I have been very happy with the Sigma. I use it as my main lens too since it is a 2.8 and the Macro is just an added bonus.

RBeckom

Shot from forty feet away with the Kodak Z-981. Notice the mosquito above the frogs eye.

bigharpoon

I don't think many of us take true Macro shots. To get a 1:1 reproduction ratio on the negative plate or image sensor requires a specialty lens. Today's jargon has transformed Macro to mean any shot regardless of reproduction ratio that has been enlarged to the point where it is bigger than life size. Do I care? No. Do most people care? No. Is it true Macro? No.



Cool shot, bigger than life, not macro though, just enlarged. The ratio on the image sensor for this shot was 1:1.8. Splitting hairs, you'd have to be talking to a real pro to find someone who might actually get upset over this. All the same, there is a difference between an enlargement and a true macro shot.

Have you seen the other photography enthusiast thread Enfidl started? That one is cool, as is this one! Great shots, bring on the photos!

ENFIDL

RBeckom:

ENFIDL:

I shoot with a DSLR so I'd have to get a lens to do it. I honestly wouldn't use a different camera since I have a DSLR so that'd just be X amount of money to put towards the lens instead

I can see your point. From time to time I run across good deals on used lenses. I'll keep you in mind if your interested.

Thanks brother!

ENFIDL

jimmyv723:

ENFIDL:

I shoot with a DSLR so I'd have to get a lens to do it. I honestly wouldn't use a different camera since I have a DSLR so that'd just be X amount of money to put towards the lens instead

What camera do you use? I have a Canon T2i and I picked up a Sigma EX 50mm Macro lens on Ebay and it was under $200 shipped. They go for over $350 new and this one was in like new condition. I know a lot of people frown on third party lenses and components but I have been very happy with the Sigma. I use it as my main lens too since it is a 2.8 and the Macro is just an added bonus.

I shoot with a Nikon D50 and the old lady shoots on a D5100. I'll have to check out Sigma's lenses. Thanks for the info man

jimmyv723

ENFIDL:

jimmyv723:

ENFIDL:

I shoot with a DSLR so I'd have to get a lens to do it. I honestly wouldn't use a different camera since I have a DSLR so that'd just be X amount of money to put towards the lens instead

What camera do you use? I have a Canon T2i and I picked up a Sigma EX 50mm Macro lens on Ebay and it was under $200 shipped. They go for over $350 new and this one was in like new condition. I know a lot of people frown on third party lenses and components but I have been very happy with the Sigma. I use it as my main lens too since it is a 2.8 and the Macro is just an added bonus.

I shoot with a Nikon D50 and the old lady shoots on a D5100. I'll have to check out Sigma's lenses. Thanks for the info man

No problem and I'm pretty sure they make that same lens for a Nikon mount too. I was in the same boat and actually got just the camera body when I got my T2i and then got the Sigma lens. The lens I really want to get is the Canon 24-105 4.0 but it's a $1000 lens. I like that the Sigma is a Macro lens but also 2.8 so it's still a great all purpose lens. Hope you can find something that's not too expensive.

RBeckom

bigharpoon:

I don't think many of us take true Macro shots. To get a 1:1 reproduction ratio on the negative plate or image sensor requires a specialty lens. Today's jargon has transformed Macro to mean any shot regardless of reproduction ratio that has been enlarged to the point where it is bigger than life size. Do I care? No. Do most people care? No. Is it true Macro? No.



Cool shot, bigger than life, not macro though, just enlarged. The ratio on the image sensor for this shot was 1:1.8. Splitting hairs, you'd have to be talking to a real pro to find someone who might actually get upset over this. All the same, there is a difference between an enlargement and a true macro shot.

Have you seen the other photography enthusiast thread Enfidl started? That one is cool, as is this one! Great shots, bring on the photos!

In my opening statement I explained what true macro was. That being said, this thread is about having fun with your camera. Not true macro on some of my photos true, but some of my work is. As I explained I'm just exploring this hobby and I definitely have A lot to learn. I still haven't gotten A DSLR camera as of yet so as you pointed out my true macro work hasn't begun yet. In the end I have fun with my photography and that's whats important to me.

bigharpoon

RBeckom:

bigharpoon:

I don't think many of us take true Macro shots. To get a 1:1 reproduction ratio on the negative plate or image sensor requires a specialty lens. Today's jargon has transformed Macro to mean any shot regardless of reproduction ratio that has been enlarged to the point where it is bigger than life size. Do I care? No. Do most people care? No. Is it true Macro? No.



Cool shot, bigger than life, not macro though, just enlarged. The ratio on the image sensor for this shot was 1:1.8. Splitting hairs, you'd have to be talking to a real pro to find someone who might actually get upset over this. All the same, there is a difference between an enlargement and a true macro shot.

Have you seen the other photography enthusiast thread Enfidl started? That one is cool, as is this one! Great shots, bring on the photos!

In my opening statement I explained what true macro was. That being said, this thread is about having fun with your camera. Not true macro on some of my photos true, but some of my work is. As I explained I'm just exploring this hobby and I definitely have A lot to learn. I still haven't gotten A DSLR camera as of yet so as you pointed out my true macro work hasn't begun yet. In the end I have fun with my photography and that's whats important to me.

Having fun is what it's all about! I tried to word my post in a way which said shooting true macro wasn't important to me. I think your shots are great, keep 'em coming.

RBeckom

bigharpoon:

RBeckom:

bigharpoon:

I don't think many of us take true Macro shots. To get a 1:1 reproduction ratio on the negative plate or image sensor requires a specialty lens. Today's jargon has transformed Macro to mean any shot regardless of reproduction ratio that has been enlarged to the point where it is bigger than life size. Do I care? No. Do most people care? No. Is it true Macro? No.



Cool shot, bigger than life, not macro though, just enlarged. The ratio on the image sensor for this shot was 1:1.8. Splitting hairs, you'd have to be talking to a real pro to find someone who might actually get upset over this. All the same, there is a difference between an enlargement and a true macro shot.

Have you seen the other photography enthusiast thread Enfidl started? That one is cool, as is this one! Great shots, bring on the photos!

In my opening statement I explained what true macro was. That being said, this thread is about having fun with your camera. Not true macro on some of my photos true, but some of my work is. As I explained I'm just exploring this hobby and I definitely have A lot to learn. I still haven't gotten A DSLR camera as of yet so as you pointed out my true macro work hasn't begun yet. In the end I have fun with my photography and that's whats important to me.

Having fun is what it's all about! I tried to word my post in a way which said shooting true macro wasn't important to me. I think your shots are great, keep 'em coming.

I wasn't being snarpy, I was just explaining how this thread came about. What about some shots from you? The frog was just A impulse shot that came out cool.

drpepperdude

I've been dabbling in macro photography as well. Here's some shots I tried doing of my front yard roses. I shot these in macro but with a regular lense at about 18mm aperture. Still need to learn how to control my f-stop.

RBeckom

drpepperdude:

I've been dabbling in macro photography as well. Here's some shots I tried doing of my front yard roses. I shot these in macro but with a regular lense at about 18mm aperture. Still need to learn how to control my f-stop.

Now that's what this thread is about. Great photos. Anyone else?

RBeckom

RBeckom:

bigharpoon:

RBeckom:

bigharpoon:

I don't think many of us take true Macro shots. To get a 1:1 reproduction ratio on the negative plate or image sensor requires a specialty lens. Today's jargon has transformed Macro to mean any shot regardless of reproduction ratio that has been enlarged to the point where it is bigger than life size. Do I care? No. Do most people care? No. Is it true Macro? No.



Cool shot, bigger than life, not macro though, just enlarged. The ratio on the image sensor for this shot was 1:1.8. Splitting hairs, you'd have to be talking to a real pro to find someone who might actually get upset over this. All the same, there is a difference between an enlargement and a true macro shot.

Have you seen the other photography enthusiast thread Enfidl started? That one is cool, as is this one! Great shots, bring on the photos!

In my opening statement I explained what true macro was. That being said, this thread is about having fun with your camera. Not true macro on some of my photos true, but some of my work is. As I explained I'm just exploring this hobby and I definitely have A lot to learn. I still haven't gotten A DSLR camera as of yet so as you pointed out my true macro work hasn't begun yet. In the end I have fun with my photography and that's whats important to me.

Having fun is what it's all about! I tried to word my post in a way which said shooting true macro wasn't important to me. I think your shots are great, keep 'em coming.

I wasn't being snarpy, I was just explaining how this thread came about. What about some shots from you? The frog was just A impulse shot that came out cool.

Nice photo by the way.

jlmarta

drpepperdude:

I've been dabbling in macro photography as well. Here's some shots I tried doing of my front yard roses. I shot these in macro but with a regular lense at about 18mm aperture. Still need to learn how to control my f-stop.

I see an aphid there, Dude. Better get out the bug spray. LOL

RBeckom

In keeping with the rose theme. One of my own.

camgfs

I'm really not sure if these count as "Macro" or not? They are not blown up versions of the image, but they are "larger than life" because of the way the digital camera can capture the image. These are simply sections of the full size images. The subject is a Golden Pheasant that was lost in my neighbourhood.

2 head shots / sorry but you will have to scroll right to view some of the image.




And this is a section showing the detail on the tail feathers:

RBeckom

camgfs:

I'm really not sure if these count as "Macro" or not? They are not blown up versions of the image, but they are "larger than life" because of the way the digital camera can capture the image. These are simply sections of the full size images. The subject is a Golden Pheasant that was lost in my neighbourhood.

2 head shots / sorry but you will have to scroll right to view some of the image.




And this is a section showing the detail on the tail feathers:

Fine photos, macro or not. This thread is more about having fun with cameras than specifics.

RBeckom

Hang in there little fellow.

slickric

i have actually been thinking of getting into the macro stuff recently. i cant afford an expensive camera or anything but they do have macro and wide angle lenses for the iphone. if you want to consider that macro. i think i would like it when taking photos of my cigars

RBeckom

Not macro but definitely A big hint to A different thread.

RBeckom

I found this one cool. Yes, I'm easily amused.

RBeckom

I found this one cool. Yes, I'm easily amused.

RBeckom

I just ordered A four piece macro lens kit for my z981 today. It includes A 2x, 3x, 4x and 10x lens. For this camera I also had to order A lens adapter in 72mm. These lenses are stack-able so magnification should be no problem. If all works well it will be my first real venture into true macro. All included I spent less than sixty dollars for the equipment. Macro on A budget. I'll post new photos when the lenses arrive and we'll see if the money was well spent.