#MAKRO OBJEKTIV SOFTWARE#
#MAKRO OBJEKTIV ISO#

There are two upsides to this method: First, image quality is extremely high, since diffraction is a non-issue. We have a separate tutorial on focus stacking at Photography Life as well. Then, you can merge them into a sharp bug photo from front to back. For example, you may take one photo where a bug’s head is in focus, one where the wings are in focus, and a third where the back legs are in focus. To counteract this tiny depth of field, you take several photos at different focus distances and combine the best parts of each in post-processing. It involves taking your photos at more “moderate” apertures, with lower diffraction but a shallow depth of field (usually f/8 or f/11).

#MAKRO OBJEKTIV ISO#

NIKON D7000 + 105mm f/2.8 105mm, ISO 800, 1/250, f/22.0 Method 3: Stack a Set of Macro PhotosĪnother method is focus stacking.

Still, it is important to keep in mind that an f/22 image with diffraction looks far sharper than an f/4 picture without any depth of field. On top of that, diffraction starts to have a noticeable impact on the sharpness of your photos. However, a flash is essentially mandatory with this method, since you are losing a huge amount of light. The upside to using such a small aperture is that it is easier to get your subject to appear in focus – though still tough – and your depth of field becomes manageable. The next method (and the one I use the most) is to stop down the aperture to a small value. However, I do not recommend it if you want to take life-size photos at 1:1 magnification. The downside is that it becomes nearly impossible to focus your lens handheld at the closest magnifications, since there is essentially no depth of field.įor that reason, this method works best if you are trying to take photos of subjects that are a bit larger, in the range of 1:4 to 1:10 magnification.

#MAKRO OBJEKTIV SOFTWARE#

The benefit of this approach is that you don’t have to worry about complex lighting setups or software fixes to make your macro photos look good, since you’ll generally capture enough light to make things work. If that seems fine to you, just open your lens’s aperture as wide as possible (or only slightly stopped down – something from f/2.8 to f/5.6), and you’re set to take macro photos. You may choose to live with a thin depth of field for your macro photography – to the point where you won’t be able to get an entire ant head to appear sharp at the same time. So, how do you balance depth of field with capturing enough light? There are a few ways, each with their own compromises.

With all these issues together, your close-up photos can look like you’ve left on your lens cap in the middle of the day.

You’ll need to be at very fast shutter speeds in order to reduce blur from camera motion (which is magnified for close-up photography), also darkening the image.

Apertures like f/11, f/16, or smaller are necessary in order to get enough depth of field, but they reduce light.

Your flash might not point at the right angle to illuminate your subject.

Your camera itself usually blocks some natural light.

Why not? There are four main reasons why you’ll have to work with very little light in macro photography:

The thin depth of field is related to another challenge of macro photography: You don’t have much light. At 1:1 magnification, your depth of field may be so thin that you can’t get a fly’s head and feet both to appear sharp at the same time, even though they are just millimeters apart! NIKON D7000 + 105mm f/2.8 105mm, ISO 100, 1/40, f/3.2 When you take close-up photos, you naturally end up with very little depth of field, even at small aperture values. At these distances, a normal aperture of f/8 or f/11 typically will render a sharp scene from front to back (aside from extreme telephoto shots, since telephotos have less depth of field). For non-macro photography, your subject won’t be especially close to your camera – maybe 5 or 6 meters, or even as far away as the horizon.

Makro objektiv