I think I am getting the hang of insect closeups "Pic Heavy"

[Bonhomme Richard]

Back to the 70-300mm lens.

[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

And this guy checking out what I am doing

[IMG][/IMG]

[DemoTex]

1. Nice .. really nice!

I took some dragonfly pics yesterday. They were swarming at the lookout tower, but they would not land on anything!


"Snake Doctor Moonlighting"

[Bonhomme Richard]

2. I like it. n/t

[BlueStreak]

3. Very nice.

And just an impertinent question about your handle. There was a Stan Kenton tune by that name, featuring Kenton's long-time lead trombonist, Dick Shearer. He's one of the most under-appreciated trombonists, I think. Is this the reference, or is it something else?

[Bonhomme Richard]

7. No. I sail and am also a history buff...

I picked the name from John Paul Jones ship.
On the other hand I am also a working musician with a gig tonight. So Hmmmm!

[BlueStreak]

8. Then Kenton was probably referencing John Paul Jones also

in a play on words.

[alfredo]

4. Beautiful images.

[Solly Mack]

5. Bugs! I love bugs!

Pretty bugs that are always smiling.

[Dragonfli]

6. Very Nice

[silvershadow]

9. Very nice! :) nt

[truth2power]

10. Those are awesome, Richard...I wonder if you could take the time

to post some technical details about those pics.

I purchased a DSLR Nikon D3100 a few months ago, with the 18-55mm kit lens. My primary interest is in nature photography and close-ups of insects etc. I'm looking for a zoom lens.

Questions for you: Your depth of field is really shallow on those insect pics. Is that something you did with a software program (tweaking the images) or are those straight from the camera?

Is that 70-300mm a really fast lens? If so, that would put it in about the $800 range. Yikes!

How close were youto those insects?

Any other advice? Thanks so much.

(Like the deer, too)

[Bonhomme Richard]

11. I'm not a techy guy but to answer

Last edited Sat Jul 20, 2013, 11:20 AM - Edit history (1)

The camera is a D-300 and the lens is a nikon AF-S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR telephoto. No, the lens isn't very fast and was around $600 if I remember right. The shots were taken about 4 feet away with the lens maxed at 300mm. I think that is why the depth of field is so shallow due to the compression. One other reason may also be that I have to enlarge the photo and crop in order to get the close up picture I wanted. The thing is I should be using a macro lens for this type of stuff but just can't afford it right now. My primary concentration is larger animals and started on the dragonflies as a lark while nothing else was happening. I am glad I did as I enjoy it.
Most of the shots were done at ISO 800, between 1/250 - 1/640 aperture and as high an f- stop I can which on some of the pictures was 7.1.
For insects I would strongly recommend a macro lens and one thing I have gotten used to is using a monopod. My tripod is just too bulky to be carrying around and setting it up would take too long as my subjects usually don't stay around long. It is a big help because so many of my shots are in low light and the distances to the subject can be far.
Some suggestions for wildlife photos:
If you are on the move hunting for subjects you need to move very slow, and I mean slow. Every step I seem to concentrate on not snapping twigs with my feet. Sometimes it can take me 10 minutes to go 30'. Move stop and observe. Rinse and repeat. You need to see them before they see you. Being on the move is haphazard at best but this is how I approach an area and I might get lucky.
Find a spot where you can see as large an area as possible that also affords the best light (usually it is dawn or dusk) and stay put. Everything around already know you are there but if you stay in one spot and don't move then things will return to normal in about an hour. I don't wear camouflage as I have found that not moving suffices. It seems that if I stand or sit close to a tree the animals tend to take me as part of the tree. I also pay attention to which way the wind is blowing my scent. Patience is the key.
An area where heavy woods butt up to open fields seems best as the animals will come out into the open to feed and for predators that can be dinner served. Setting up in deep woods can be problematic as your light (even on a sunny day) can be very poor due to the overhead canopy. Another downside is that you can't see very far and you need to see them first.
Don't take the picture at the first chance. Try to hold off for the right shot. They will hear the shutter go off even at 50 yards so try not to be too anxious. Let them get closer and...don't move. Lessons I learned the hard way.
Don't rely on hearing. You don't hear predators. If they made noise they don't eat. Constantly scan. I can't tell you how many times I scan an area, look in another direction for a couple of seconds and when I scan back to the first area there is an animal out in the open. It never ceases to amaze me.
Wow, that was long winded and as I write I keep thinking of more stuff.I hope this helps and enjoy your new camera. I absolutely love observing nature and have had many enjoyable experiences. Even if I never see anything it is still good. Like zen.
Oh, and for editing I use gimp and also shoot in raw. I'm just a cheap guy.

[truth2power]

12. Richard - Sorry for the delay in getting back to you...

I want you to know that you've given me more useful information than you can imagine. I pick people's brains and this (along with lots of reading) is how I learn. Some examples of what I gleaned from your post:

Lenses - You can get away with not having an extremely fast lens ( f 2.8 or so) and still get shallow depth of field. You just have to have some sort of zoom and be relatively close to your subject. Fast lenses are mucho $$$ which I can't afford right now. I've been able to get some suitable practice shots of flowers using my kit lens (18-55mm) and getting very close. But, of course, flowers don't run away from you, which gives you a chance to perfect your technique.

I've been looking at some used lenses at http://keh.com . Been looking at 55-200mm which can be very affordable. I've talked with some people who have dealt with them and they've been satisfied. A 300mm would be nice, though.

I know that bumping up the ISO is going to give you more noise, but at 800 it probably isn't that noticeable. I just discovered that there's a noise reduction setting on my camera. Haven't look at it in detail at this point.

Yeah, I crave a macro lens, but it's not something that's in my budget right now. Also, I'm going to look into monopods. Sounds like a good idea. I have a regular tripod that I used with my previous film SLR. So, I'm ahead of the game there.

Your description of techniques you use to photograph these critters was impressive. Things I've never thought of. Thanks.

Shooting in raw? Haven't tried it yet. The way I understand, the file is larger but the image is easier to manipulate.

There's a nature center, of which I'm a member, just down the road from me. Acres and acres of woods. Opportunities await!

One additional thing for anyone who might be reading this: I found a great little book on Amazon - Nikon D3100: From Snapshots to Great Shots. There's also one for the D3500 model. Well worth taking a look at (the 'look inside' function on Amazon.) Better than poring through the manual.

Good luck in your endeavors.

t2p

[Bonhomme Richard]

13. One more suggestion

You can get very good lenses cheap. I bought 3 from a retired photographer for $100. The deal is that you are willing to manual focus. I got Nikon lenses down to 1.4 for next to nothing. One is a 135mm 2.8F. My suggestion is check Craigslist and places like that for older manual focus lenses. Most applications you have all the time in the world and the light meter on my D300 works with these old lenses. I don't know about your camera but mine can be set to accept the old lens so all I have to do is manual focus.

[truth2power]

14. Manual focus - Isn't it interesting how we get hook on technology. I've looked

at manual focus lenses but sort of dismissed it.

Yet, on the old film SLR's, we manual focused all the time, didn't we?

[Bonhomme Richard]

15. It is interesting. I looked up your 3100 and

I see that it will not meter the old lenses so I guess that is out the door. My D 300 will meter so it is a cheap option for me.