Share your Macro Photos

[lindam]

Have you captured an awesome macro photo? Post it here and share the story behind the shot. Be sure to include the Canon gear you used. This photo was captured with a Canon EOS 5D Mark III and a Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM lens at f/5, 1/160 sec, ISO 100.

[ebiggs1]

I think you got your hands around it just fine.  Good job explaining it.

[Waddizzle]

---

@fatcat wrote:

Diverhank,

Ah HA! ok, I totally get the Crop factor and getting a little more reach.  And yes, cropping after will decrease the pixils for that image (agreed).

I've been reading recently with the new mirrorless with even more pixils in same amt of space can actually look worse  and create more noise noticable when enlarging (for print usually)   

The rational for that is they dont have enough light (or room) in that same allotted area and it reads as noise.. So there can actually be too many pixels....I thought it was interesting and contrarty to what I believed.

---

My analogy to an ice cube tray may explain the apparent higher noise levels.  

An image sensor is covered with millions of of photosites.  Drawing on the rainfall comparison, each photosite collects a volume of water.  How much water gets collected depends upon the intensity of the rainfall, and how long rainfall was collected.  

Suppose you want to measure the amount of water that was collected, so you pore it onto a scale to weigh it.  But, a small volume of water remains behind in the cup, and gets “lost”.  A larger cup will leave a similar volume of water behind, but that lost volume is a smaller percentage of the total volume of water collected in the cup.

It works almost the same way with photosites collecting light.  There is a “noise floor” in the electronics.  This is a point where a small amount of collected light cannot be differentiated from noise.  

Suppose a small photosite can collect 1000 photons, but the first 100 are lost to noise.  A larger photosite may collect 1500, or more, photons, but the same level of noise, the first 100 photons, are lost to noise.  The larger photosites would have a higher signal-to-noise ratio than a smaller photosite.  

Notice that I have not made any mention of the size of the image sensor, because the size of the sensor is irrelevant.  What matters is the size of the photosites, the spacing between them, and the residual noise of the electronics.

[fatcat]

 nevermind

[Waddizzle]

This discussion has gone on a tangent, and is was off topic.  Use this thread below to continue the discussion.

https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/General-Camera-Discussion/Open-Discussion-on-Image-Sensors/m-p/25...

I would encourage a Moderator to break this thread, and move the off-topic discussion to the above link.

[fatcat]

then WHY did you reply to it if you think its a problem here as a side note?

[MamaFeak]

No edits done. Canon EOS Rebel T6i.  f/5.6; ISO 100; 55mm with 18-55mm lens.

[MamaFeak]

Shutter 1/160; f/5.6; ISO 100 55mm 

[AndyMilnePhotog]

Camera: Canon Rebel T6i

Lens: 50mm f1.8 STM

Shutter Speed: 1/1600

Aperture: f/3.5

ISO: 100

Focal Length: 50mm

Camera: Canon Rebel T6i

Lens: 50mm f1.8 STM

Shutter Speed: 1/200

Aperture: f/3.5

ISO: 400

Focal Length: 50mm

[ballottasphotog]

A dragonfly rests on a blade of grass by a small river. The raw file was processed in Digital Photo Professional.

• Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T5

  Lens: EF75-300mm f/4-5.6
• AV: ƒ/5.6
• Focal Length: 300.0 mm
• TV: 1/1000
• ISO: 1600
• 

[ballottasphotog]

A dragonfly rests on a blade of grass by a small river. The raw file was processed in AfterShot Pro 2.

• Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T5

  Lens: EF75-300mm f/4-5.6
• AV: ƒ/5.6
• Focal Length: 300.0 mm
• TV: 1/1000
• ISO: 1600
•