After much searching on ML and through Google, I thought my understanding of depth of field and the required settings for my camera were adequate. Unfortunately, the photos I'm taking are still lacking both in depth of field and sharpness. Here are a few photos using an 8 MP Canon Rebel XT and the included lens (18-55mm) set to 18. The camera was set to aperture priority mode (f-16). The model is 12 inches away from the lens front and fluorescent lighting was used. I used the camera's setting for this type of lighting. Camera shake was eliminated by using the timer and a tripod. The first three photos were taken using f-16 and the last two at f-22. Any advice or suggestions are appreciated. It appears my images get grainer with the increase from f-16 to f-22. My problem may be the limitation of the lens used. Would switching to a wide-angle lens improve my depth of field?

F16


F16


F16


F22


F22

I agree with you in that I think you are doing things correctly. I also agree that the focus looks soft. My first question is this: with the camera set to aperture priority, what is the EV set at? Even though the blue background is generally used, it might be affecting the speed the camera is selecting. Have you tried bracketing the shots? Since this is digital, it won't cost money to bracket the shot and see the results.

Might also try and not use the extreme settings on the lens. I know that when I am fully telephoto on my camera, the focus is soft. I may be wrong, but the extreme wide on this lens may be soft as well. You have a lot of blue around the model, you may not need to be at the widest angle

What ISO are you using? The higher the ISO setting, the grainer the image, no matter how sharp the focus is.

Even though you are using flourescent lights and have set the camera to flourescent, it may not be the best setting. May I suggest experimenting with the setting to see which is correct. Your lights may be sunlight balanced and daylight may be the correct setting. I have one sunlight balanced flourescent light that I use and my camera is set to daylight, not flourescent.



I think you have the DOF OK. Just the amount of light entering the lens and the focus may need to be adjusted.

The photo below is the sharpest photo I can get with my old 2 megapixel Olympus C2100UZ



Just a few of my observations.

Aloha,
Val

I used the lowest ISO possible (100) on the camera when taking the earlier pictures. Taking your advice, I changed the light setting for the camera from fluorescent to Tungsten and changed the actual lighting as well. Staying at f-16, I used manual focus to take 11 pictures of a T90. Starting at the business end of the barrel, I focused on a different part of the model in each picture working my way back 1 inch at a time. Using a trial version of "Helicon Focus" I then combined all 11 images producing one image with the entire model in focus. Here are the results.
While this appears to work, Taking 11+ pics for one usable image is a minor pain. With the Canon Rebel XT, does anyone have a recommendation for the best additional lens for model photography?

I had to let out a loud WOW and pick up my jaw from my desk when your photo came up on the screen. Taking multiple photos for one good one is a pain at first, but after awhile you get used to it and eventually it becomes second nature. Whenever I go on vacation, I usually end up taking 2000 - 3000 images and having only 300 that I find printable and I actually only print about 100. For models, I usually end up taking about 100 photos of the model during and after construction for records sake and for articles for the local IPMS Newsletter.

Now that you've got your camera obeying your every command, I hope to see more pictures of your models (and they are excellent models by the way) posted here on Missing Links.

Aloha,
Val

.

the grainier the image will become. A compromise of lenses from what I've researched. To get the DOF at these macro ranges you simply are at the outer envelope of what a mid-range lens can handle. A dedicated Macro lens in the 50mm or 60mm range is really the best for high quality photos and will serve you better.

With that said, my Nikon D40 w/18-55mm lens works best in the f/18-22 range for my setup. Also the actual bulb I use is a Phillips Cool White which does not have the bluish tint that normal florescent bulbs create--it has a real crisp true white coloring to it, if that helps.

And shoot in RAW format. There are tons more data in each image and (at least with PS) you have total control over color tint, sharpness, contrast etc. before you even get to the editing stage.

Nice T-90.

HTH,

Mike

I'll take your advice on the lens type. As for lighting, I still have not sorted that out. I have switched between fluorescent and regular bulbs and tried different settings with the white balance such as automatic, fluorescent and tungsten. I'll tray the RAW advice today. Thanks again.

The F/stop has nothing to do with making the image grainier.
Using a higher ISO will cause noisier photos.
A higher F/stop will allow more DOF.
When did you get your info from?

Owen

by stating that "grain" increases at higher f/stops. While DOF does increase, there is a limit to the sharpness or quality of the image above around f/22 on my Nikon D50. I've done a few bracketed tests previously up to f/32 and anything above f/22 that tends to soften the image with each step even if more of the model appears to be in focus. With my 18-55mm lens I get the best overall quality and DOF compromise from f/18-f/22. Just my observations and experience.

Best,

Mike