The Photographic Community for Users of Olympus and OM system micro 4/3 digital cameras and E-series DSLRs
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Register Search Forum Actions New Document New Folder List Folders List Documents List Groups List Users Camera resources Olympus 4000 Olympus 4040 Olympus 5050 Olympus 5060 Olympus 7070 Olympus 8080 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus E-M5 Olympus E-P1 Olympus E-P2 Olympus E-PL1 Olympus E-PL3 Olympus E1 Olympus E3 Olympus E30 Olympus E300 Olympus E330 Olympus E400 Olympus E410 Olympus E420 Olympus E500 Olympus E510 Olympus E520 Olympus E620 m4/3 lenses Camera FAQs Terms of Service Photo contest Submissions page Hall of fame Folders About this site Documents Polls Private folders Public folders Categories Abstract Action/Motion Animal Architecture Candid/Snapshot Cities/Urban Documentation Fashion/Glamour Historical Landscape Macro Miscellaneous Nature Night/Low light People Polls Sand and Sea Sky Tourist/Travel Contact Us |
The Point
Hypodermic needle used for subcutaneous injection of Insulin. Needle diameter is 0.25mm. Lens combination was a Tamron 90mm SP Macro, with 57mm of OM type extension tubes and a MF-1. I tried using an EX25 with the 18-180, but manual focus is very coggy when seen with the E30 in magnify mode. I moved the camera instead, but the picture was still better with the Tamron.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright ©2004, MyOlympus.org. All Rights Reserved. |
Don't like it too much
Sorry to be direct, but this picture doesn't have too much interest besides the technical difficulty of shooting a small target with macro.
The background is plenty of chroma noise, and the composition is not appealing.
On the technical side, the magnification is not bad.
Jes Consuegra at 07:17 CEST on 08-Aug-2009 [Reply]
NO SUBJECT
Jes Consuegra wrote:
> Sorry to be direct, but this picture doesn't have too much interest besides the technical
> difficulty of shooting a small target with macro.
>
> The background is plenty of chroma noise, and the composition is not appealing.
>
> On the technical side, the magnification is not bad.
>
Hi Jes, Thanks for your comments for this one, and for the trees. This photo came about from seeing how much magnification I could get with the equipment I had. The noise is due to absolute minimum noise reduction to preserve detail, and the 'straight up' approach seemed to maximise agression! Magnification is around 50 times, depending on your screen.
Mike Babson at 23:00 CEST on 13-Aug-2009 [Reply]
Magnification
>Magnification is around 50 times, depending on your screen.
Really?. It's much higher than I thought at first...
I would have put the needle diagonally across the image, and some noise reduction via Noise Ninja would do little harm on the details, removing mainly the chroma noise in the background.
I've taken the freedom of modifying it as I think it could be done:
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/2843/p73171921sr.png
One improvement could be to place some object nearby the needle to get an idea of the proportions.
Knd regards,
Jes.
Jes Consuegra at 15:21 CEST on 15-Aug-2009 [Reply]
NO SUBJECT
Jes Consuegra wrote:
> >Magnification is around 50 times, depending on your screen.
>
> Really?. It's much higher than I thought at first...
>
> I would have put the needle diagonally across the image, and some noise reduction via Noise
> Ninja would do little harm on the details, removing mainly the chroma noise in the background.
>
> I've taken the freedom of modifying it as I think it could be done:
>
> http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/2843/p73171921sr.png
>
> One improvement could be to place some object nearby the needle to get an idea of the proportions.
>
> Knd regards,
>
> Jes.
>
The object was to show as much detail as possible. I had a go at reducing noise using the digital noise tool in Paint Shop Pro 9, but any thing I did reduced detail beyond what I wanted. I'll have a go at showing it with something to compare proportions - Mike
Mike Babson at 19:58 CEST on 16-Aug-2009 [Reply]