Can someone explain (P&S macro mode)....

[--chris--]

....why i get better macro pics at full tele with teh camera further from the subject on my G5 than at wide angle with the camera closer to the subject?

 

The difference isnt huge, but the sharpness is noticeable.

 

This was at full tele...

 

This was at wide angle, as close as i could get the camera to the subject and still get it to focus...

 

F/ and shutter speeds are different.

[markalot]

Are you using a fixed ISO or auto?

 

Best grab the EXIF info off the file and tell us shutter speed, aperature, and ISO if included.

[--chris--]

Ill see if i saved the originals on those. I beleive the first pic was:

 

f/3.2 1/500 and iso 200

 

The second i think was f/2.2 1/160 iso 200 as well. I should shoot the same coral for a better visual comparison, but the question is still the same. I dont know if its a quirk with the G5 camera or if all cameras shoot better macro at tele rather than wide angle (when tele lens is used, im completely ignoring fixed lens in this thought).

[Veng]

There's all kinds of things going on here (I can't see the original pictures at work, but I don't really need to based one what you've said).

 

Depth of field changes based on aperture, even on a theoretically perfect lens. Also, on real lens (non-theoretically perfect), sharpness generally degrades as you stop them down (lower f stop number). For zoom lens, you will find sharpness and distortion will change as you go through the zoom range as well. Which end is better is really just a function of the specific lens design.

[--chris--]

So in the case of a P&S camera, its dependent on the camera because the lens and camera are one piece. But with a DSLR/SLR/etc its a function of the lens, independent of the camera right?

 

Thanks!

 

edit: Another question has popped up in my head. You said sharpness degrades with a wider aperture? So if i am concerned with sharpness, i should in general shoot with a moderate to wide aperture?

[Veng]

So in the case of a P&S camera, its dependent on the camera because the lens and camera are one piece. But with a DSLR/SLR/etc its a function of the lens, independent of the camera right?

 

Thanks!

Yes. It's a lens function, not a body function.

 

 

edit: Another question has popped up in my head. You said sharpness degrades with a wider aperture? So if i am concerned with sharpness, i should in general shoot with a moderate to wide aperture?

In general, yes you should be backing off ~1 stops vs wide open your lens if you've got the light. However, in low light, opening the aperture is probably better than shooting extreme ISO settings. "Sharpness" is also relative. Wide open, many lens are "tack sharp" to most eyes. There's also depth of field, which refers to how much is in focus.

 

If you look at this review: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.2-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx about 3/4s of the way down the page is a girl standing in front of a fence. Scrolling through the apertures by hovering over the f numbers below the pictures will show you the effects from an EXTREMELY wide to fairly narrow, and shows all of the effects of aperture changes from depth of field, sharpness, vignetting, etc.

 

Also, keep in mind, at very small apertures diffraction comes into play. I'd be concerned around ~F/16, but possible to detect starting around F/8 on a crop sensor. Luckily, for most photography, having too much light is a rare concern.

[--chris--]

That example in the article you linked is pretty good. I didn't realize vignetting would come into play with aperture adjustments.

 

Thanks for the help, im learning!

[Veng]

That example in the article you linked is pretty good. I didn't realize vignetting would come into play with aperture adjustments.

 

Thanks for the help, im learning!

Do remember, when doing a review like that, those are un-post-processed (well, technically minimally post processed as they are technically jpgs) images, and that is an extremely wide open aperture, so you are really looking at an extreme case. For the lens in your price range, it won't be that much, but it is there. However, it is very easily removed in post processing using a lens profile. One of the reasons lightroom is well worth it's price.

[--chris--]

Our sons been getting pics taken monthly and the studio we have been going to uses lightroom. My wife was ahhh'ing the pics, i was starring in wonderment at what they were able to do with Lightroom.

 

Yes, i am aware of its value! Does adobe offer a student discount on that? Im long removed from school life, but my little cousin still has a .edu address and she might be kind enough to let me use it.

[Veng]

Our sons been getting pics taken monthly and the studio we have been going to uses lightroom. My wife was ahhh'ing the pics, i was starring in wonderment at what they were able to do with Lightroom.

 

Yes, i am aware of its value! Does adobe offer a student discount on that? Im long removed from school life, but my little cousin still has a .edu address and she might be kind enough to let me use it.

I believe there is an educational version. The full version is 95$ or something. You can get a free trial version of any of the adobe products for 30 days as well. There's also a free down load of the beta version of lightroom 5 as well I think. I haven't looked into it, so I don't know all the details to the beta.