Sorry I tried searching, but to no avail.
But is there a general rule of thumb to what Um to shoot at? Like maybe 40Um for a 5mm specimen? Maybe like a depth of field kind of thing?
I'm shooting up to 5X at this stage with a Sony a6300 + Laowa 25mm 2.5-5X. (Sweet spot is f/4 as I've found)
For example I've tested on a fly, with just the face. And don't see much difference between 15Um and 40Um.
I'm not the most technically advanced photographer, but I have been shooting around 7years, so I do know a bit, just never bothered with the technical stuff lol
But the majority had been landscape and architecture where you just play with f-stop and maybe max 3 focus stacked images.
Any links regarding this?
Is there a Depth of Field calculator?? Maybe?
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Take a look at this recent thread on the subject:
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 647#238647
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 647#238647
Pau
Shay,
In answer to your specific question, the asterisk sign (“*”) is used, in this instance, as the math symbol for "multiplied by". For example, “A = B * C” is shorthand for “A equals B times C”. However, you can safely ignore all formulas and get the information you need without using mathematics, by simply looking at a chart.
Take a look at Table 2A in Rik Littlefield's DOF Estimates For Macro/Micro. While this is a portion of the supporting documentation for Rik's Zerene Stacker software, it is applicable to any macro shooting with the sort of lens you're talking about. Also read the couple of paragraphs above table 2A, which explain how to use it.
Your Sony a6300 has an APS-C sensor, so as those paragraphs explain, you want to look at the stacking increments near the center of the boldfaced values. At nominal f/4 and 2x, this means 0.079 mm (79 microns). At nominal f/2.8 and 5x, this means 0.025 mm (25 microns).
Be aware that there is room for using either larger or smaller stepping increments than these specific numbers. The values in table 2A are good, safe ones to start with. As you gain experience, and if you care to do additional testing, you may find reason to choose different values. For example, with excellent equipment and technique, for big prints, you might find that increments about half the suggested size give you a bit more contrast in fine detail. If you have a rapidly wilting specimen or will be downsizing for Web use, you might choose a larger increment to save time. But Table 2A is a great place to start.
--Chris S.
In answer to your specific question, the asterisk sign (“*”) is used, in this instance, as the math symbol for "multiplied by". For example, “A = B * C” is shorthand for “A equals B times C”. However, you can safely ignore all formulas and get the information you need without using mathematics, by simply looking at a chart.
Take a look at Table 2A in Rik Littlefield's DOF Estimates For Macro/Micro. While this is a portion of the supporting documentation for Rik's Zerene Stacker software, it is applicable to any macro shooting with the sort of lens you're talking about. Also read the couple of paragraphs above table 2A, which explain how to use it.
Your Sony a6300 has an APS-C sensor, so as those paragraphs explain, you want to look at the stacking increments near the center of the boldfaced values. At nominal f/4 and 2x, this means 0.079 mm (79 microns). At nominal f/2.8 and 5x, this means 0.025 mm (25 microns).
Be aware that there is room for using either larger or smaller stepping increments than these specific numbers. The values in table 2A are good, safe ones to start with. As you gain experience, and if you care to do additional testing, you may find reason to choose different values. For example, with excellent equipment and technique, for big prints, you might find that increments about half the suggested size give you a bit more contrast in fine detail. If you have a rapidly wilting specimen or will be downsizing for Web use, you might choose a larger increment to save time. But Table 2A is a great place to start.
--Chris S.
Thank you. That's very understandable lol I only just passed my maths at college so that could be the issue :/Chris S. wrote:Shay,
In answer to your specific question, the asterisk sign (“*”) is used, in this instance, as the math symbol for "multiplied by". For example, “A = B * C” is shorthand for “A equals B times C”. However, you can safely ignore all formulas and get the information you need without using mathematics, by simply looking at a chart.
Take a look at Table 2A in Rik Littlefield's DOF Estimates For Macro/Micro. While this is a portion of the supporting documentation for Rik's Zerene Stacker software, it is applicable to any macro shooting with the sort of lens you're talking about. Also read the couple of paragraphs above table 2A, which explain how to use it.
Your Sony a6300 has an APS-C sensor, so as those paragraphs explain, you want to look at the stacking increments near the center of the boldfaced values. At nominal f/4 and 2x, this means 0.079 mm (79 microns). At nominal f/2.8 and 5x, this means 0.025 mm (25 microns).
Be aware that there is room for using either larger or smaller stepping increments than these specific numbers. The values in table 2A are good, safe ones to start with. As you gain experience, and if you care to do additional testing, you may find reason to choose different values. For example, with excellent equipment and technique, for big prints, you might find that increments about half the suggested size give you a bit more contrast in fine detail. If you have a rapidly wilting specimen or will be downsizing for Web use, you might choose a larger increment to save time. But Table 2A is a great place to start.
--Chris S.
Hi, some other calculators here
http://extreme-macro.co.uk/calculators/
also cambridge in colour forum had one last time I looked
http://extreme-macro.co.uk/calculators/
also cambridge in colour forum had one last time I looked
My extreme-macro.co.uk site, a learning site. Your comments and input there would be gratefully appreciated.
I work with a manfrotto 454 but uncommon system .
Objectives : BW APO PLAN 5x, Mitutoyo APO PLAN 7.5x, 10x, 20x and 50x, Seiwa APO PLAN 20x, BW APO PLAN 20x, Seiwa APO PLAN 10x, Nikon CF PLAN 50x, componon APO 40 mm, Componon 50 mm, Componon S 80 mm, Componon 105 mm, Componon 150 mm, Rodagon 135 mm.....
Objectives : BW APO PLAN 5x, Mitutoyo APO PLAN 7.5x, 10x, 20x and 50x, Seiwa APO PLAN 20x, BW APO PLAN 20x, Seiwa APO PLAN 10x, Nikon CF PLAN 50x, componon APO 40 mm, Componon 50 mm, Componon S 80 mm, Componon 105 mm, Componon 150 mm, Rodagon 135 mm.....
you'r is password protected ...ploum wrote:Mine is here.... In french
http://www.alpinismeetmineraux.fr/miner ... ro/pdc.ods
Open document
YAWNS _ (Y)et (A)nother (W)onderful (N)ewbie (S)hooting
-
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:33 pm
I mostly use the calculators in johan's link and IME they are accurate. I use the step size and extension ones the most.
I think you are asking about step size, right? This is directly to that calculator: http://extreme-macro.co.uk/focus-stacking/#calculator
You enter the F number, magnification and type of sensor and it gives you the step size. I'm guessing the sensor size is only relevant because they assume you e.g. print the same size at the end i.e. you actually magnify higher with the smaller sensor.
For your example, with the Sony A6300, f/4 and x5 magnification, it says minimum step is 0.033mm (33um). So 15um probably gave redundant steps, and maybe 40um was just close enough to barely notice a difference, if at all.
All the parameters could be slightly different that it's actually not x5 at f/4 on the camera (just as a random example, sensor size might be slightly different, lens, aperture, etc.).
Also AFAIK those calculators also assume some kind of result size. I mean, take a huge blurry photo, make it tiny, it looks sharp. If you view at a smaller size then an even larger step might look similar.
I think you are asking about step size, right? This is directly to that calculator: http://extreme-macro.co.uk/focus-stacking/#calculator
You enter the F number, magnification and type of sensor and it gives you the step size. I'm guessing the sensor size is only relevant because they assume you e.g. print the same size at the end i.e. you actually magnify higher with the smaller sensor.
For your example, with the Sony A6300, f/4 and x5 magnification, it says minimum step is 0.033mm (33um). So 15um probably gave redundant steps, and maybe 40um was just close enough to barely notice a difference, if at all.
All the parameters could be slightly different that it's actually not x5 at f/4 on the camera (just as a random example, sensor size might be slightly different, lens, aperture, etc.).
Also AFAIK those calculators also assume some kind of result size. I mean, take a huge blurry photo, make it tiny, it looks sharp. If you view at a smaller size then an even larger step might look similar.
-
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 7:35 am
- Location: Denmark
I came around an android app called Macro Tools, it got the following features:
- Focus Stacking Step Size
- NA to Fstop
- Infinite Objective Focal Length
- Extension Tubes Magnification
- Bellows Magnification
- Reverse Lens
- Raynox Adapter
- Closeup Lens
- Stacked Lens Magnification
It's free but contains ads, which can be removed by getting the PRO version, it's 2 bucks or whatever.
I suggest you give it a look
https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... ulator.pro
- Focus Stacking Step Size
- NA to Fstop
- Infinite Objective Focal Length
- Extension Tubes Magnification
- Bellows Magnification
- Reverse Lens
- Raynox Adapter
- Closeup Lens
- Stacked Lens Magnification
It's free but contains ads, which can be removed by getting the PRO version, it's 2 bucks or whatever.
I suggest you give it a look
https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... ulator.pro