for some time now I have been intrigued by the idea of wide-angle macro (or more accurately wide-angle close-up) in order to show the subject in its environment. I've been looking into ways of achieving wide-angle close-up shots but inevitably it's not straightforward. Most wide-angle lenses don't have particularly good magnification and won't take an extension tube because the minimum tube is 12mm in Canon fit which usually takes the minimum focus distance inside the lens. Anyway, the most promising option seemed to be the Tokina 10-17 fisheye lens which allows extremely close focusing and has a reasonable reproduction ratio of 1:2.5.
So I recently splashed out and had my first go with it early yesterday morning. The first thing I realised was that because this isn't a true macro lens you have to get *very* close to the subject in order to have it reasonably large in the frame - in the shot above the end of the lens was literally almost touching the butterfly. It can be difficult to manoeuvre the tripod in that close. This means you're restricted to fairly large subjects that don't mind you getting very close to them. The next problem then is lighting as the lens being so close blocks the light. In the shot above I therefore used a reflector (which I think was a bit too obvious).
Anyway, I'll be interested to hear any views people have about this approach. The shot above is somewhat experimental and far from perfect so I'm more interested in views about this general style of photography (and how to achieve it). One thing I will be trying soon will be a 1.4 converter with the lens. Being a fisheye is still maintains it's extreme wide angle FOV but increases the lens's magnification.
Bit busy at the moment, but just had to comment here... I like this a lot... we were only talking last weekend about one of my favourite Dragonfly images taken by my old Boss, Frank Greenaway, using a Hasselblad SWC in a very similar vein...
This is a true pleasure to view....
As the Tokina is a fisheye, has there been any correction done?
thanks Phil and no, I haven't corrected this. It was taken at 17mm where the fisheye effect is less obvious. Also, the lack of straight lines has helped me.
I am hoping to photograph a dragonfly in a shot of this type before the summer is out, I didn't manage to find one yesterday.
I like this Matt
Most of my close ups( especially flowers ) until I got the 150 macro were done like this with a Sigma 18 - 50 and sometimes with a no. 4 close up on..I,ve been doing a lot more like that lately too..
Its surprising how easy it is to get close some times and I found there was a lot less camera shake.
Cheers
John
Nice approach, really like the result - like you say, the reflected light is a little to strong though.
I've been frustrated that Canon's thinnest extension tube is 12 mm and I've been searching for a company to make me something thinner. No luck yet but there are motion picture camera companies who do such mods; I'll pass on the details if I find one.
I tried similar things myself with a Sigma 24mm f1.8 (1:2.7) though I was disappointed with the quality of this lens and didn't get very far (haven't used it since switching to digital).
The winning pic in last year's National Insect Week was a wide angle close up. I don't know what camera it was taken with, but there's a lot of it about with the use of compact cameras, where a 1cm focus at 6mm is not uncommon. I've seen some good results.
Very nice Matt, love you vision and approach here,love the composition here and the BG shown. Wide angle I'm learning gives a real 'depth' to the image and this photo is the perfect example of that, well done
Posted by David Taylor on July 10, 2009 at 6:08 AM
Looks fine on my monitors. The butterfly really stands out against the BG which gives a hint of its environment. Very nice indeed.
I like it Matt, only suggestion would be to do it without the flower to the left, sort of separating the butterfly completely from the BG ?
Posted by jack chapman on July 10, 2009 at 8:39 AM
great image, the lighting is particularly striking
Posted by Mark Sisson on July 10, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Love the concept and also (although as you say it's a bit obvious) I think the strong reflected light lifts the main subject out of the environment well.
Mark
Posted by Lewis Thomson on July 10, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Love it Matt, very well thought out, looking forward to seeing more!
Lewis.
Posted by eric weight on July 10, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Now that I do like. So much buterfly photography seems to revolve around close-up detail and smooth backgrounds. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it has more in common with studio photography than wildlife photography and this different slant is very refreshing. It tells us far more about the environment that this butterfly was found in. I hope you get some more of these, because I can't wait to see them. The extra light light on the subject really helps make up for its smaller size in the frame IMO. Wthout it the subject might be a bit lost. Eric
That is one terrific shot. The light, I think, beautifully directs us to the main idea, the butterly.
If I started to get anywhere close to a butterfly it would be long gone. This fella was cooperative and let you get right up on him. Is there a technique to that?
many thanks for the comments, I'm glad people like this style of photography as it appeals to me also.
Stephen, the trick is to catch them early in the morning (or late in the evening) on a cool day when they tend to be far more approachable. Thanks for your comment.
This is beautiful. I agree with Stephen's comments about the light. I wouldn't worry about the light from the reflector. This almost looks light-painted. And I don't see the difference between this and people burning around the periphery to focus attention on the main subject. I'd say you are well on your way to achieving what you set out to do.
Nearly missed this one Matt. I like it, a more interesting presentation of 'macro', and shows the environment well - which I like. You've given me a new perspective, thank you!
Works really well and make a great change from the normal type of macro shots that we do. I have also been thinking of finding a new way at doing things but none have worked out as good as this one.
Look forward to seeing more of these type of shots.
Discussion
24 repliesSo I recently splashed out and had my first go with it early yesterday morning. The first thing I realised was that because this isn't a true macro lens you have to get *very* close to the subject in order to have it reasonably large in the frame - in the shot above the end of the lens was literally almost touching the butterfly. It can be difficult to manoeuvre the tripod in that close. This means you're restricted to fairly large subjects that don't mind you getting very close to them. The next problem then is lighting as the lens being so close blocks the light. In the shot above I therefore used a reflector (which I think was a bit too obvious).
Anyway, I'll be interested to hear any views people have about this approach. The shot above is somewhat experimental and far from perfect so I'm more interested in views about this general style of photography (and how to achieve it). One thing I will be trying soon will be a 1.4 converter with the lens. Being a fisheye is still maintains it's extreme wide angle FOV but increases the lens's magnification.
Canon 40D with Tokina 10-17mm lens, f9, ISO 320.
1000 pixel version here.
Matt
This is a true pleasure to view....
As the Tokina is a fisheye, has there been any correction done?
I am hoping to photograph a dragonfly in a shot of this type before the summer is out, I didn't manage to find one yesterday.
Matt
Major
David
Most of my close ups( especially flowers ) until I got the 150 macro were done like this with a Sigma 18 - 50 and sometimes with a no. 4 close up on..I,ve been doing a lot more like that lately too..
Its surprising how easy it is to get close some times and I found there was a lot less camera shake.
Cheers
John
Nice approach, really like the result - like you say, the reflected light is a little to strong though.
I've been frustrated that Canon's thinnest extension tube is 12 mm and I've been searching for a company to make me something thinner. No luck yet but there are motion picture camera companies who do such mods; I'll pass on the details if I find one.
Cheers,
Chris
I tried similar things myself with a Sigma 24mm f1.8 (1:2.7) though I was disappointed with the quality of this lens and didn't get very far (haven't used it since switching to digital).
The winning pic in last year's National Insect Week was a wide angle close up. I don't know what camera it was taken with, but there's a lot of it about with the use of compact cameras, where a 1cm focus at 6mm is not uncommon. I've seen some good results.
Greg
Mark
Love it Matt, very well thought out, looking forward to seeing more!
Lewis.
If I started to get anywhere close to a butterfly it would be long gone. This fella was cooperative and let you get right up on him. Is there a technique to that?
Stephen, the trick is to catch them early in the morning (or late in the evening) on a cool day when they tend to be far more approachable. Thanks for your comment.
Matt
Fran
Great stuff Matt.
Cheers
Austin
Agree with the above very different and good to look at.
Keith.
Des
Works really well and make a great change from the normal type of macro shots that we do. I have also been thinking of finding a new way at doing things but none have worked out as good as this one.
Look forward to seeing more of these type of shots.