>>3820275I just realised I haven’t done any macro shots since i bought the r5... i’ll pull out the 100mm f2L tomorrow and find something interesting to post here
>>3825206I sometimes attach my 50 reversed to the front of the 100... if the extension tubes aren’t enough hehe. All stacked up i get about 4X macro.
>>3825213Well... it’s kind of the same as any photography - how much background do you want? Also, just like portraits - with a shorter focal length you have to get closer to the subject to fill the frame - and at macro range, that can be CLOSE. It can be a problem depending on your subject.
>>3825911Beautiful
>>3825912What the hell is that? A bread board?
>>3825926Yes. But... sometimes i go on a walk, take a few dozen flower photos and put them up on my fb. Just something beautiful to brake up all the bullshit on fb for my friends to spend a few minutes looking at. No real story. Just... nice flowers. I did though last spring get some VERY nice flower shots with sun flares. Those were very nice. Actually turns out they aren’t macro at all... but you can imagine they would have a similar feel if the camera was closer in. Not macro but now feels like i should post a photo to illustrate the point
>>3825937Haha well post a photo? Show us the bible to this new religion
>>3826546That’s some serious zoom. What’s the gear?
>>3829104That’s super lovely :) i wish it was stopped down a lot though... i love shallow dof but macro is just too shallow in most cases imo
