Back Modifications (0)
Views 102 Unique 49 Award Shortlist   

Baby Tree Frog

By Dackj
I found this little guy on one of my flowers the other night and have never seen a baby before. Only about 1/4Ē long. Unfortunately i donít have a macro lens yet so I used my 24-105 and set the distance to the lenís minimum and still had to crop the photo quite a bit. It was night so I used a battery powered LED in one hand, the camera in the other and tried not to fall in the pond while I tried to compose the photo.

Tags: Tree frog Wildlife and nature

PortraitPro Sale - 50% Off + Save An Extra 20% With Code: ZBFV23


dark_lord Plus
18 3.0k 832 England
30 Jul 2019 9:58PM
Nicely done using the LED light. Many would have used flash, but the best light is what you have to hand.

However, there is a limitation and that's the amount of light, or rather lack of it. It's meant the use of a high ISO, which while not too much of an issue with your RP as regards noise performance, does mean the shutter speed becomes relatively slow.
Even with image stabilisation, there is a limit tas to how effective it is (and that varies from persom tp person). That becomes mor acute when you crop significantly as any errors in focus or shortcomings in technique become apparent.

This is soft but it looks like your focus is ok, the softness coming from the large crop.

Yes a true macro lens would have been preferable. Even thos with such lenses may find themselves without it on occasion (again iot's the best lens you have is the one you have with you).

As this is a crop at least you have a choice as regards the composition and while I'd trim a bit off the top here so that the pink streak on the petal goes into the top right corner of the image, this is a pleasing result. The pink and green are an attractive combination and despite the laerge crop would, I think, get some votes in the main Gallery.
31 Jul 2019 7:36AM
Under the circumstances you've described I think you got a very acceptable result. I've found that when using a zoom at the long end and closest focusing distance it's wise to use manual focus, and it seems you did that here.
Of course using a macro lens would have let you get closer and subsequently would have avoided the need for such a heavy crop.

Now, I don't own a macro lens, and have never used one, but I assume that with any lens the shorter the distance from front element to subject, the shallower depth of field becomes, necessitating a smaller aperture and therefore either a higher ISO... and you were already on 2000 here... or a much slower shutter speed and therefore a tripod.
But like I said, I've never actually used a macro lens Blush.....

mrswoolybill Plus
16 3.5k 2563 United Kingdom
31 Jul 2019 7:56AM
Very well improvised - and you have steady hands!
paulbroad Plus
15 131 1294 United Kingdom
31 Jul 2019 8:07AM
A good record. Technically it could do to be a bit sharper and, as above, you really need a macro lens for such subjects so you have actually managed quite well.

I usually use flash to get the low ISO, small aperture (F16 of f18) to get maximum depth of field and thus a fast shutter speed. All three things are best for good macro, then tight careful focusing. True macro lenses are designed to work well at small apertures so diffraction is less of a problem.

banehawi Plus
18 2.8k 4331 Canada
31 Jul 2019 1:02PM
Well done

dudler Plus
19 2.0k 1965 England
31 Jul 2019 6:19PM
You've done well. Stopping down was essential, for depth of field.

My main thought, though, is that the G is, at present, pretty full of shots taken at the limits, pushing the technical envelope.

It's really important to test all the limits (a driver who has skidded a car many times will avoid skids more adroitly than one who has never explored the limits of adhesion, and may well ahve a better idea of how to control the car once it's sliding), but nobody should make a habit of it... Learn from it, and if you want to shoot closeups regularly, first try a couple of closeup lenses (though with a 77mm thread they won't be trivially cheap, even on eBay). If yo ufind it really addictive, then go for a macro lens.

You did the right thing to shoot at 105mm - and if you do end up with a macro lens, yo umay find that it absolutely eclipses the results from a zoom, even an L series, at all focus distances.
pablophotographer 11 2.1k 431
1 Aug 2019 1:18AM
No macro glass?

Check if the new fit is compatible with
Canon's E x t e n t i o n T u b e EF12II or the MOVO extension tube set...


Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.