In the amazing week and a half of no rain we had, I really enjoyed the glorious clouds each day, even more so on my exploring of southern NH on my 4-day weekend.

Thunder on the horizon. Captured on the way to the grocery store by one of my favorite spots.

The even was pretty fun to watch, and my first time shooting anything on a stage. I learned a bit, and will be better prepared next time.

A few months ago we had a nicer day then most and was able to convince my ever homework crunching grad student wife to pack up and go birding for the day. We packed up the dog to go with us and we set out for an adventure. For the previous week we had heard about some white-winged crossbills in huge masses in Salisbury. Off to Mass we went. We had a good time, saw a couple of short-eared owls hunting, but barely saw any crossbills. Near the end of the day, we finally saw a lone three. Making it official I had finally seen them for the first time, but not really well.

Today I decided to take advantage of the nice weather and take my camera out and see if anything was happening on campus. Having wandered for a while and having found nothing, I wa son my final loop heading eventually back to the office when I spotted some activity happening on the ground. A quick look through the lens and I was convinced they were crossbills. I slowly approached, taking a few snaps, and then moving closer, being careful not to spook them. Maybe it helped, maybe they didn’t care. Before long I was on one knee taking photos, while they hopped around. One was so bold as to actually hop right under me, where I squatted. Others, came within a foot of me while they feasted on pine cones left from branches trimmed before the snow and left for spring clean up.

as classes changed, students began walking by, and of course stopping for a few moments when they saw some guy with a d200, with grip and 70-300mm lens. A few impressed with the birds, some not, non really scared the birds. A few times the flock moved to a new location nearby, but again with a little patience accepted anyone that came near. It was an awe inspiring moment for sure, that resulted in some cool photos.

The lamest video I have EVER seen.

Of course I love my “neekon” equipment, but it seems to me something went wrong. Earlier in the year Nikon was talking up a huge press release, which ended up being Blues Traveler concert, and there was tons of speculation flying about on nikon rumors and Ken’s site about new camera bodies being announced at PMA 2009. All we got was this video, and a “yeah we haven’t changed our lens mounts in 50 years!”

Bummer, really. I was hoping some newer camera bodies would drop the price of the D700. Looks like I’ll be waiting a long time to go full frame digital.

Back in my article Manfrotto 055XPROB & Giottos MH 7001-621: A dynamic duo for sure, I discussed how happy I was with the Giottos MH-7001. Before I go any further, I’m still very happy with the MH-7001. I found however, when I tried to mount our spotting scope on it, it was not able to hold the weight. There was also the inability to pan independently from loosening the ball, making panoramic photos all but impossible. Enter the Giottos MH-1000.

The Gittos MH-1000 supports 22lbs as apposed to the 7001 which supports 13lbs. The MH-1000 also offers independent panning release from the release of the ball joint. Giottos realizing that panos might be something people want to do with this head, have kindly marked the circumference of the head at 5 degree intervals. In addition, there’s a third knob, which allows tension to be set. Which means when you loosen the ball knob, your camera won’t go flopping down if you accidentally loosen it too much.

I was also able to easily transition to this ball head by taking the 621 Quick release assembly off the 7001 and moving it to the MH-1000. A nice feature with these heads is that they are fairly customizable with almost any quick release system you my want to put on it.

Overall I’m already happy with the head, despite having just received it and have been pretty busy so I haven’t made it out in the field. I have however been digging through settings on my new d200 (that’s another article) and playing with the ball head too. Once I get out in the field (tomorrow) I’ll hopefully have retrained myself from the d40 and older ball head.

After 3 years of watching, I finally got to capture why this bird hangs out here. My camera was at home, but I was able to scare up a D200 w/ 200-400 f4 for these shots. At only 30 or so feet away. w00t!

I’ve messed around with time lapse a few times with my Nikon D40 and D70, but it usually means being tethered to a laptop (PC) and using Nikon’s expensive Nikon Camera Control Pro software. It works for in house set ups, but what if you want to do something in the field?

I spent some time yesterday and today trying to find an inexpensive intervalometer to trigger my camera’s shutter. Most cost $160 (or more!) which really made me think I would consider a lightly used Nikon body with this function built in if I could sell my D70. The biggest problem is most of these devices required pc-sync connections on the cameras to work. Both the D40 & D70 lack this, and rely on a small IR port for remote shutter release. Then it hit me.

Some time ago I purchased an Asus A626 mobile pc to help me keep track of my life. Among other things it contains an IR port for communication. It took me a little while this morning to track down a solution, but I finally found it. I downloaded the trial of TV remote controller 5.7 from pdawin.com. Now, I’m not entirely sure why anyone would use their PDA/Mobile PC to change the channels, etc on their tvs, but hey lets exploit it!

What set this apart (beside the $14 price) was this software could learn any remote code, and has a timer setting. After quickly running through the learn sequence using my ML-L3 remote and programing it to a custom function I tried the timer function setting it to activate the virtual button as quickly as every 15 seconds and I was soon firing both D40 & D70 at the same time!

Now granted, if you factor the cost of the A626 it’s a fairly expensive set up, however if you already have a Mobile PC, or PDA with an IR port and can find the right software to do this, you just found an inexpensive and light way to do time-lapse in the field.

This will come after descriptions of camera parts. So there are not some labels on the camera body. I felt this topic would take the longest to create graphics for, and result in graphics for other topics. So it’s a bit out of order.

______________________________________________________

There seems to be a misconception that macro photography just means being close to your subject. In fact, by definition, macro photography actually deals with the size that an image is recorded on your particular medium, either film, or CCD/CMOS. From wikipedia.org:

Macro photography is close-up photography; the classical definition is that the image projected on the “film plane” (i.e., film or a digital sensor) is close to the same size as the subject. On 35 mm film (for example), the lens is typically optimized to focus sharply on a small area approaching the size of the film frame. Most 35mm format macro lenses achieve at least 1:2, that is to say, the image on the film is 1/2 the size of the object being photographed. Many 35mm macro lenses are 1:1, meaning the image on the film is the same size as the object being photographed. Another important distinction is that lenses designed for macro are usually at their sharpest at macro focus distances and are not quite as sharp at other focus distances.

Huh?

It’s actually pretty simple. If you think of it in a visual way. I’m going to use film plane regardless of the fact I actually shoot in digital, its still the same thing. Lets look at it graphically.

If I use a lens that can reproduce at a 1:1 ratio, then the image of the item is recorded on the film plane at actual size. Take the image of the Lego soldier on the right to be the real world. Using 1:1 you see on the left (image cropped to fit in camera shell) that only some of the soldier will be in the photo. What is captured in the photo will appear to be very large when viewed. Directly bellow is an example of what recording at 1:2 would look like. The image recorded is half the actual size of the object.

For an extreme example, bellow is what recording 2:1 would look like. The image would be recorded at twice the actual size.

Who cares?!

At first it might not be so evident why this really matters. It all has to do with resolution. Given using the same camera for every photo, you can’t go in and change the physical size of your sensor (excluding changing to a medium format camera, etc), you have to change the projection of the image. If you make the projection of the image larger, then you have the ability to record more detail. Lets take a look at an over simplified, and a bit exaggerated visual.

In this first image, lets pretend that we’re looking at how a 1:2 ratio would look. The image on the left is like viewing the image in real life. The super imposed grid represents the pixels of the sensor on your camera. Each one can only record 1 color. The image at right is what the sensor records. Take special note of the cross marks on the soldier’s chest.

Notice how not all of the detail is recorded. It looks pixelated, because it is. Now remember, I’ve manufactured these results, though I feel I’ve done them correctly and consistently, they are a bit overexerted to make the point simple.

Now lets take a look at an image if we were able to record it at 1:1 ratio. If you haven’t guessed it already, there is more detail.

Even though the sensor and resolution stay the same size, you are able to record more detail because the image is projected larger.

______________________________________________________

There are other nuances to macro photography, like depth of field among other things. That will get covered in other parts. This snippet is just to explain why reproduction ratio matters. Please, comment and let me know what you think. It will help me help the attendee’s better. Remember, if you’d like to come, the meetings are open to the public, and we always enjoy new faces!

Good macro lenses cost a lot. I’ve found a way to utilize some lenses you might already have to reach crazy reproduction ratios, like 2:1, 3:1 or more. Now NOTHING beats a REAL macro/micro lens. Nothing. However, if you want to have some fun with a different way to get extremely close, check out a Macro Coupler. It’s like a filter with two sets of male threads.

What you’ll need

• 50mm lens recommended to reverse. It must have an aperture ring, you’ll need to open it up all the way.
• Lens(es) that will magnify between ~70mm & 200mm. Too short and you’ll have way too much vignetting (like at 70), too long and it’s all but impossible to achieve a good depth of field.
• Macro Coupler that has the right filter size for one of your lenses, and optionally step-down/step up rings to match the filter size on your other lens.

I found when ordering the pieces I needed, it was easiest to match the common 52mm filter size of the 50mm lens. So I started there. Drew a rough representation of the lens, then drew in the coupler, and across the paper drew the lens I wanted to attach to. Then, with web site in hand, bandhphoto.com had the most selection, I found the rings I would need. Luckily, only one more ring was needed to get from 52 to 67mm filter size.

Then just put it all together and you have a crazy macro lens. The draw backs are you need to have the end of this contraption really close to your subject, so nothing live will play along with you. You have a very shallow depth of field, even more so while focusing, making it really hard to compose your photos.

I found to over come the DOF problem, it was easier to get a really stable camera setup (good tripod, head, and something to rest the lens on are necessary here) to move the subject.

Because your shooting through 2 lenses now, you need to use the best pieces of glass you have. You’ll lose a lot of light with this method as well, so be prepared to over light your subject.

The rest is left to trial and error while you shoot. I’ve only used this setup a few times playing around. The only photos that came out so far are these ones of the tick that my wife pulled off my back the other day. In November…

And for scale (yes, I still have my drafting tools):