Forums / Marine Systems and Husbandry – by Anthony Calfo / Archived Forums / Aquarium Photography

Some macro coral shots

SP Aquatics — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:17:55 GMT

A local lady asked me to photograph her corals for her. Seeing what you guys think of the shots(the corals were all very nice) All taken under 1 250 w mh 14k, unedited except resizing/cropping

our journey so far with pics

clairewill4 — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 03:35:42 GMT

my tank when we first got it second hand we took everything water rock etc

what it looks like now! what you think? only got two corals that we added at the weekend our stock is;

3 black and white nemo, 1 normal nemo,(the two big black and white are a pair been together for years!)

1 lawnmower blenny,1 bio colour blenny, 1 baby yellow tang, 1 zebra goby, 1 sandshifting goby, 1 fairy wrasse, 1 key hole angel, 1 mandarin, 25 hermit crabs, 6 snails, 1 arrow head crab.

Zoanthid eating spider pics

Alti — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:28:51 GMT

Excuse the crappy pics. I found 2 of these guys in QT on a colony of protopalythoa. Its embarrasing, but i freak out every time I find spiders and this time I almost dropped the colony

I have a canon S3IS and I have to park the lense right on top of the subject to get this close. It works good in the aquarium since there alot of light, but it is a disadvantage when out of the aquarium since the lense blocks the flash this close up. I put a desklight as close a I could to it and still couldnt get enough light on it.

Work Distance Macro lens

ilan_ronit — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 04:16:26 GMT

hi all

i need some help on deciding what lens to buy (canon 100 mm or canon 60mm lens)

i did some reading but still i am not so sure what will be best for me.

what i got :

canon 30d body and the kit lens

a 110 gallon aquarium (chiclids) must of fish is 3-5 inch and will get bigger 4-8 inch i belive.

i decided to buy only one of the canon macro lens but i dont understand what will better match.

in what distance i need to be in each lens for shooting?

for what size of subjects thay will suit?

i dont want to be to far for the aquarium but i dont have any idea in what distance i will need to be for taking photos of my fish.

i do like the option for taking insects photos in the future but it is very theoratic at the moment.

thanks, sorry for the headace

any help will be nice

stereoscopic

clippo — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 12:34:34 GMT

here's a bit of fun!

Although its a bit gimmicky, I've produced a few stereoscopic images recently. This is one of my better efforts although there are numerous improvements I need to make clearly.

In case you don't know about this kind of images, you need to view the pair of images cross-eyed until you see three images. Then slowly concentrate on the middle one. Takes a while to master, not everyone can do it..... I take no responsibility for headaches/eyestrain btw!

A couple fish pics

gkarshens — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 06:36:19 GMT

Camera play: Aperture

Umm_fish — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:19:41 GMT

Hey guys! I don't know if you all know this, but I'm a freelance typesetter and I unexpectedly had a day without work today. I decided that I'd spend some time with my camera trying to teach myself how to get better shots of my aquarium. The shots I get are mostly fine for what I want to do, but I do want to improve.

I thought it might be cool to share the results. Then again, it might just be boring. You tell me.

For those of you who don't know, I shoot with a Canon 20D. My favorite lens is the Canon 100mm/f2.8 macro lens. I also used the Canon Canon MT-24EX Macro Twin Lite Flash for these shots.

I wanted to set up a situation that would mimic taking macro photos of corals. I wanted small pieces that would look like polyps and I wanted to set it up where there were different levels and a lot of complexity to the composition, just like we find in our tanks with corals that we can't move to make things easier on ourselves. But, I wanted to also take away the problems of shooting through water and glass so I could get some easily reproducible results where I could control most of the variables. Well, that and I don't have many corals at the moment.

So, I found a seedhead of Queen Anne's Lace. That's a flower that I have in my garden. The seeds are in a circular pattern and have little burrs that look a whole lot like coral polyp tentacles.

I set up the seedhead on my kitchen counter, propped up on a bottle of blood red fingernail polish (Halloween _was_ just yesterday). I just simply plopped my camera setup down on the counter. Ambient light was the fluorescent under-cabinet lights and the ugly spotlights in the kitchen. (Man, they are ugly.) I did use a remote shutter release to try to keep my grubby hands off the camera. I didn't use the mirror lockup feature of the camera (and you can really see it in the f/32 photo).

By the way, I do shoot in camera RAW format. That means that I do have to do some exposure adjustment in Photoshop. For all of these photos, I made these values the same:

Temp: 3750 (For some reason, RAW color temps are the opposite of lighting. The bluer colors are lower values and the yellow colors are higher).
Tint: 0
Exposure: 0 (I like my photos a little darker)
Shadows: 35 (Again, I like my photos a little darker)

I left the rest of the values alone.

I'm shooting these shots in "Aperture Priority" mode. That means that I had manual control of what the aperture value (the "F-Stop") would be and the camera automatically made decisions regarding what the rest of the values would be. That makes it really easy to get a bunch of quick shots of the same scene, just by rotating one control. You'll see below that changing the F-Stop made a dramatic difference in how long the shutter would be open. That's something to definitely keep in mind.

Let me present the overall photos first. Photo details follow the shot.

IMG_8343.cr2
Shutter speed: 1/10 sec
F-Stop: f/2.8
ISO: 100

A really quick shutter speed, but as you can see a really shallow depth of field.

IMG_8342.cr2
Shutter speed: 1/6 sec
F-Stop: f/3.5
ISO: 100

IMG_8341.cr2
Shutter speed: 1/4 sec
F-Stop: f/4.5
ISO: 100

IMG_8340.cr2.jpg
Shutter speed: 0.5 sec
F-Stop: f/6.3
ISO: 100

IMG_8339.cr2
Shutter speed: 0.8 sec
F-Stop: f/8.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8338.cr2
Shutter speed: 1.6 sec
F-Stop: f/11.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8337.cr2
Shutter speed: 3.2 sec
F-Stop: f/16.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8336.cr2
Shutter speed: 15.0 sec :eek:
F-Stop: f/32.0
ISO: 100

The difference that changing the F-Stop made is really quite astounding. But, the question becomes: Can you keep your corals still long enough to take some of the shots with the looonnnng shutter speeds.

As an aside, notice that at the higher F-stops, you can really start to see the dust specks on my lens or sensor. Time for a cleaning!

I also made some crops that include roughly the same group of seedpods throughout this series. Here are those shots:

IMG_8343.cr2
Shutter speed: 1/10 sec
F-Stop: f/2.8
ISO: 100

A really quick shutter speed, but as you can see a really shallow depth of field.

IMG_8342.cr2
Shutter speed: 1/6 sec
F-Stop: f/3.5
ISO: 100

IMG_8341.cr2
Shutter speed: 1/4 sec
F-Stop: f/4.5
ISO: 100

IMG_8340.cr2.jpg
Shutter speed: 0.5 sec
F-Stop: f/6.3
ISO: 100

IMG_8339.cr2
Shutter speed: 0.8 sec
F-Stop: f/8.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8338.cr2
Shutter speed: 1.6 sec
F-Stop: f/11.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8337.cr2
Shutter speed: 3.2 sec
F-Stop: f/16.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8336.cr2
Shutter speed: 15.0 sec :eek:
F-Stop: f/32.0
ISO: 100

Thanks! I hope this helps someone decide to start messing around beyond point-and-shoot.

Canon EOS model cameras

CTReefer — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:25:35 GMT

Hi All: I have been thinking about purchasing a Canon EOS 40D DSLR camera. Have been reading reviews of this camera on various online camera sites. I was curious to know if anyone has any experience with this model camera & how they like the practical operation of this camera?

Any Pros & Cons would be appreciated. I am planning on using the camera for general photography as well as perhaps purchasing a housing for under water use as well. What are your thoughts?? Thanks.

Steve

White Balance (AWB vs. CWB)

CTReefer — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:12:43 GMT

Hi ALL:

Started taking some Macro photos of my tank with my new Olympus E-510 DSLR. The photos were taken with a Sigma 105mm Macro lens which is specifically made for the 4/3 rd's system Olympus. There are basically two ways of white balancing (WB) your camera. One way is to allow the camera to do it by Auto WB (AWB) or you can set the WB yourself, which is called Custom WB (CWB). Most cameras also have a WB mode that you can set by choosing one of the preset color temperatures based on a Kelvin scale, ie, Cloudy (6000K), Tungsten (3000K), White Flourescent (4000K), etc.. However, selecting one of those presets usually leads to very poor WB unless conditions are exactly the way they are supposed to be, which in photography is never the case. So, what is one to do? Well the answer is to set a CWB for each condition that your are photographing under. Basically you would use either a grey or white sheet with the light reflecting on same & then, after selecting CWB, aim the camera at the sheet & take a picture. Well you are not really taking a picture but rather are letting the camera "see" & "record" what "White" should look like when recorded by the camera's sensor. It is a very easy thing to do & can make a very big difference in the photographic image.

This first picture was take by using the camera's AWB. You can see that although the color green is recorded, it is washed out & just doesn't look right.

The next picture is virtually the same photo taken the same way but this time I did a CWB first before taking the picture. You can see the obvious difference between these two pictures.

BTW, both of those pictures were shot in the 'RAW' format rather than the 'JPEG' format. What's the difference you ask? Well, RAW format would be similar to a negative taken in the old 35mm film format. One had to then "process" this negative and had a lot of lattitude regarding how the picture wound up looking. This is true for RAW on a digital camera whereby the processing is done in the computer rather than in the camera as in the JPEG format. RAW stands for well RAW whereas JPEG stands for "Joint Photographic Experts Group". I have learned to always shoot in the RAW format as you have much more leeway when it comes to processing the photo.

Anyway, here are a few more shots taken with Macro in the RAW format:

I hope that you enjoyed the pictures as much as I enjoyed taking them!

Comments appreciated.

Steve

Nikon D300 vs. Canon EOS 40D?

CTReefer — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 07:45:17 GMT

Hi All: After reading various reviews on both of these cameras, I am rethinking making a purchase. I am now leaning towards the Nikon D300 even though it cost more.

The Nikon has 12.3mp (mega pixels) while the Canon has 10.1mp

Nikon also has the auto self cleaning sensor function

Nikon has both Aperture & Shutter priority settings

Here are the specs in a nutshell:

12.3 megapixel DX format CMOS sensor

Self-cleaning sensor unit (low-pass filter vibration)

ISO 200 - 3200 (6400 with boost)

14-bit A/D conversion

Nikon EXPEED image processor (Capture NX processing and NR algorithms, lower power)

Super fast operation (power-up 13 ms, shutter lag 45 ms, black-out 100 ms)

Shutter life 150,000 exposures

New Multi-CAM3500DX Auto Focus sensor (51-point, 15 cross-type, more vertical coverage)

Auto-focus tracking by color (using information from 1005-pixel AE sensor)

Auto-focus calibration (fine-tuning) now available (fixed body or up to 20 separate lens settings)

Scene Recognition System (uses AE sensor, AF sensor)

Picture Control image parameter presets (replace Color Modes I, II and III)

Custom image parameters now support brightness as well as contrast

Six frames per second continuous shooting (eight frames per second with battery pack)

Compact Flash UDMA support

3.0" 922,000 pixel LCD monitor

Live View with either phase detect (mirror up/down) or contrast detect Auto Focus

HDMI HD video output

'Active D-Lighting' (adjusts metering as well as applying D-Lighting curve)

Detailed 'Control Panel' type display on LCD monitor, changes color in darkness

New MB-D10 vertical grip fully integrates into body, multi battery type compatible

Buttons sealed against moisture

Seems to me that Nikon has a winner with this camera! What's your take??

Steve

Amphiprion Ocellaris

MattTVI — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:05:59 GMT

As a graduation present, my wife got me a Nikon SB600 flash. I built a simple bounce card using printer paper cut into a trapizoid thanks to the genious of Peter Gregg.

Anyway, this is one of my first shots w/ the flash (took some shots of my dog first). This shot was taken in manual mode. The in-camera and flash settings are listed below:

Nikon D50

Sigma 105mm f2.8

ISO 200

1/200

f10

Flash was set to bounce mode w/ exposure compensation of +.3EV

I boosted the color & light levels a little bit and sharpened the image slightly w/ Nikon Capture NX.

Getting fish to pose.

120gallons — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:08:50 GMT

Any ideas to get a fish to stay still?

Tank Pictures with my new E-510 Olympus

CTReefer — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 18:39:40 GMT

Here are some pictures that I took last night when using this camera for the first time. Not the best & I have a lot to learn about the functions of this fantastic camera. The pictures were taken with a hot shoe mounted flash unit at various ISO settings and were all hand held, NO tirpod used. I have plenty of more photos but I just picked these because I liked them! Enjoy & any feedback is welcome. OK, let me have it!!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2218/2113656638_8f9fea0a23_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2046/2113663404_39f34d4b1c_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2346/2113662978_2f6101e27c_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2393/2112882197_3b72741c51_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2414/2113661510_d4d8aef2fe_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2364/2113660688_1c0281758c_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2014/2113660080_7106bb0ebd_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2065/2112879391_72ea84a448_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2014/2113658652_544243fa6b_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2286/2113657864_16819e99a5_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2116/2113657262_e34e3d6442_m.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2416/2113655932_c266dfcdd5_m.jpg

Camera play3: Going (almost) full manual

Umm_fish — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 18:55:05 GMT

This is a follow-up to a couple of other camera "articles." More exercises, really. Anyway, you can find them here:

If you read through the other two exercises, you know that I'm on a quest to take better macro photos of my aquarium inhabitants. The photos I used to take using the auto settings on my camera were fine, I just wanted to do better.

First of all, I decided that I really needed an expanded depth-of-field (the area that's in-focus in the image). Macro photos have horrible depth-of-field (measured in millimeters on the subject of your photo). When I figured out how to get a good depth-of-field by adjusting the f-stop in "Aperture Priority" mode on my camera, I then realized that to get good depth-of-field the exposure times were so long that it would be impossible to get a good sharp photo of something flowing in the water.

So, I then tried to mitigate the long exposure times by changing the ISO settings. It certainly helped, but I found the graininess of the photos to also be unacceptable for me. After all, I really wanted the very sharp focus that I seen in some tank shots.

What to do? Well, in some of my internet searches, I came across some insect macrophotographers who were getting incredible close-up shots with really high apertures (f-stop, for depth of field) values AND really short exposures (to freeze the subject's movement) AND really low ISO values (for really sharp photos). some of them were getting very sharp photos with unbelievable amounts of enlargement (up to 5:1 ratios) AND handholding their cameras! Obviously, they were outside and had a ton more light to work with, but as your macro ratios get past 1:1 the light reaching the sensor drops enormously. Surely I ought to be able to do what I want to with the light available at a "measly" 1:1 ratio.

The gentleman online taking the 5:1 photos uses a very similar camera setup to mine, except for the lens. Same camera, same flash. I looked at the numbers for his photos and read his instruction on taking insect shots. Basically, when you switch the camera to full manual, you aren't really on "full" manual at all. There's still one element that the camera controls: metering the shot and setting the power of the flash. (You can also control this area, too, but that's for another day ... maybe.)

I had also read in one of the Canon owner's manuals regarding E-TTL (the automatic through-the-lens metering system) that the camera tries to setup the shots so that the flash is used as "fill." That is, the camera is programed to use the available light from other sources and then use the flash to correct areas that are still too dark.

Thinking about this one night, I asked myself, "What were the goals of the camera programmers here? Why would they make the flash just provide fill light?" My theory is that firing a flash is energy expensive. So, the camera programmers might have been trying to get away with using as little flash as possible for each shot in order to make the batteries last as long as possible. Well, that's good and all, but I want to take aquarium shots in my home. I have batteries. I have wall outlets. I don't need the camera to be miserly wit the power. In fact, the more power it gives the photos, the higher my f-stops can be and the shorter my exposure times. All with fine detail.

Woohoo! Now, how to make the camera really fire that flash?

The secret is to go full manual. That's right--you have to set the f-stop, the ISO, AND the exposure.

Sounds scary, right? But, in practice I think it's going to be easy. Set the f-stop high (f-16), set the ISO low (100), set the exposure really fast (1/250 sec.) and see what the camera does with the flash.

I haven't had time yet to really take a photo shoot with a bunch of exercises. But, I did find a really cool spider hanging out on the wall of my bathroom tonight so I thought I'd give it a try. The spider was not really moving, so that let me get all setup, but it was about 5 feet off the ground and I had to stand in the bathtub to get this photo so there wasn't really a way to set up a tripod (even if mine wasn't on the way back to the manufacturer for repairs). So, a perfect practice subject and a handheld shot.

IMG_8585.cr2
Shutter speed: 1/250 sec
Aperture: f/16.0
ISO: 100

And a detail shot:

Now that's what I'm talking about! The eyes aren't quite in focus, but I'm pretty happy for the first time shooting a camera in manual.

I'll try to do some exercise shots soon and add them to this thread.

Olympus E-510 Evolt Camera review

CTReefer — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 08:54:31 GMT

Hi All: Just read a review on the Olympus E-510 Evolt Camera which can be seen here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse510/

This appears to be a very good DSLR camera for the money. It can be purchased with two lenses for around $750.00. When compared to both the Nikon & Canon comparable cameras, it's really quite a bargain. Anyway, just thought that some of you might be interested in reading about this 10.1 mega pixel camera as an alternative to other more expensive DSLR's.

Steve

full tank fluorescent

clippo — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 06:05:15 GMT

shot of my 4 year old reef taken in pure fluorescence using 350D plus 50mm f1.8mkII

critique/comments welcome!

Camera play2: ISO

Umm_fish — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 12:51:31 GMT

This is a follow-up to another camera exploration post:

http://forum.marinedepot.com/Topic75692-26-1.aspx

Now I know how to get reasonable depth-of-field in my photos by taking control of the F-stop. But, the cost really seemed to be fairly prohibitive shutter speeds. My new goal was to see what I could do to reduce the shutter speeds and still get acceptable results.

One of the benefits of doing this little exercise for me has been just typing in the numbers over and over again--reinforcement that I seem to need. One of the things that struck me yesterday was typing in ISO: 100 over and over.

Last night, as I was researching, I came across an article written by a guy taking incredible insect photos (http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm). He's using a fairly similar setup to mine (except for the lens) but he's doing all of his shots _handheld._ So, what the heck is he doing taking 5:1 macros shots without a tripod? Other than just possessing nerves of steel?

One of the things I noticed is that he is using a very different ISO setting than I am. Hmm. Time to read about ISO.

The ISO setting on a digital camera tells the camera what film speed you want to use? Okay, there's no film, but it's telling the camera's sensor to _act_ like different types of film.

When you open the shutter outside on a sunny day, you expect that a _lot_ of light is going to pour in. You need a film (or here, the sensor) that will respond slowly to light. This corresponds to the ISO 100 setting on the camera. This setting will give you pictures that are the most clear and with the most detail, but it'll also take the longest shutter speed to do it.

The higher you set the ISO setting, the more responsive to light the sensor will be and the faster the shutter speed. What's the trade-off? The higher the ISO, the grainier the image will be.

So, again, it's a matter of looking at trade-offs. Take a look at some photos (the photo details are below each photo):

IMG_8344.cr2
Shutter Speed: 5.0 sec
F-Stop: f/16.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8345.cr2
Shutter Speed: 2.0 sec
F-Stop: f/16.0
ISO: 200

IMG_8346.cr2
Shutter Speed: 1.0 sec
F-Stop: f/16.0
ISO: 400

IMG_8347.cr2
Shutter Speed: 0.5 sec
F-Stop: f/16.0
ISO: 800

IMG_8348.cr2
Shutter Speed: 1/4 sec
F-Stop: f/16.0
ISO: 1600

IMG_8349.cr2
Shutter Speed: 2.0 sec
F-Stop: f/11.0
ISO: 100

IMG_8350.cr2
Shutter Speed: 1.0 sec
F-Stop: f/11.0
ISO: 200

IMG_8351.cr2
Shutter Speed: 0.5
F-Stop: f/11.0
ISO: 400

IMG_8352.cr2
Shutter Speed: 1/4 sec
F-Stop: f/11.0
ISO: 800

IMG_8353.cr2
Shutter Speed: 1/8 sec
F-Stop: f/11.0
ISO: 1600

Flashes

Wannabereefer — Thu, 17 May 2007 21:14:27 GMT

Well I have decided on a lens...now I am curious about what do I need to look for in a flash? If you could point me in the right direction or give me some specifications it would be great!

Thanks again

Brock

Macro lens or tubes?

IPT — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 00:46:27 GMT

I already have a good Canon setup (28-135IS, 70-200 f4L, 300 f4L, and a 5D body), but I would like to get "closer". The 28-135 has a min focusing distance of 1.64'. Assuming you wanted to take some intimate shots of SPS (maybe even 1:1's) in a 50 gal reef tank would you get extension tubes (12, 20, and 36mm tubes by Kenko @169$) or will I need to shell out for the Canon 100mm Macro lens? How much will the 36mm tube shorten my focusing distance by (the 100mm Macro by Canon has a min focusing of 5.9" and wll get 1:1)? I am not fully opposed to spending the cash, I just want to know what I'll be able to do a dedicated Macro verse my 28-135 with extension tubes. Macro is a new world for me. I am a Landscape/Nature dude

Which Macro?

120gallons — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:56:59 GMT

I have a digital rebel.

Which lens

Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

or

Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Digital SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLR Cameras

obviously for aquarium animal shots.

Canon 40D live mode

Labman — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:19:39 GMT

Oh my I have a 40D now figured with all the features time to move up from the 20D and Wow what a step up the live mode is incredible being able to focus on a coral using 5x 10x in a 3" view finder I love it. I have a digital timer on order too so I can try to do some cool picks under moonlighting. But wow what a camera

Centropyge Fisheri

MattTVI — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:12:31 GMT

I'm experimenting with a new frame design, I'm not sure how much I like it...

This is a Fisher's angel, roughly 2" (5+ cm) long, shot with the following settings/equipment:

Nikon D50

Nikkor 28-105mm @ 105mm in Macro Mode

ISO 200

WB - Flash

SS 1/100

f16

Pop-up flash, w/ opaque lens cap for some diffusion

Pictures gone?

melev — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 22:20:45 GMT

Hi Anthony,

A few weeks ago, I posted in Ron's forum about some pods, and before I left I shared a few pictures of my reef, taken from above. Did I break some rules? I reviewed one of the sticky threads, just in case. I thought eye candy was good.

A couple from my Nano tank.

Some Full Tank Shots

PCIALF — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:13:00 GMT

Canon Rebel XT
no flash
Manual WB

Macro lens or tubes?

IPT — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 00:45:44 GMT

Macro Photo

Juca — Mon, 21 May 2007 16:45:50 GMT

Hi Antony

My new macros by my CANNOS EOS 5D + Tamaron 90 + Flash

Macro lens for Pentax

Wannabereefer — Thu, 10 May 2007 20:17:18 GMT

I have a couple of questions...i have a pentax ist ds slr digital camera, right now I have a 75-300mm tamron lens, which isnt the best at taking close ups since you have to be 4.5' from the subject...I know the pentax isnt the best camera on the market but it was affordable, I have taken some great landscape photos with it. Anyways my questions are what are you looking for in a macro lens. I have read 100mm is what you are looking for, is that correct? And what is 1:1 everyone is talking about? My camera has 1.5 maginification so if I buy a 60mm it gives me 90mm, am I right there also? Do you buy a fixed focal point or not? Sorry for all the questions, but the research I have done hasnt lead me were i wanted.

thanks

confused...

reifen — Fri, 04 May 2007 04:20:36 GMT

What would be the best for aquarium photography and (maybe) underwater photography?

Canon PowerShot S3 IS or Fujifilm Finepix S6000fd

How do you post pics

Wannabereefer — Thu, 03 May 2007 20:23:02 GMT

How is everyone post pics...sorry for the stupid question, but havnt been able to figure it out

Some of my shots with my 30D

05Xrunner — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:35:58 GMT

Hey Anthony,
I was talking to you tonight at elmers for a little about camera gear and such.
Here are a few shots I just play around with at home.

Science Project

PCIALF — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:40:13 GMT

OK here they are

This picture is Auto Setting with Flash no processing at all other than crop and re-sized nothing else.

This picture is on Manual Setting with Flash f5.6 and manual WB as you can see very dark

Macro lens suggestion

IPT — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:04:20 GMT

Hello Anthony or others,

I really like the close ups of SPS's I've seen. I am looking at getting a new lens for my system (as if "reefing" isn't an expensive enough hobby I need to be into Photography too!!). I have a few questions...I am fairly well versed at shooting, but have done little to no macro! I have the Canon 5D, and a 1.4 tele. I understand that neither the Tamron 90 nor the Canon 100mm will accept the Tele. Is that correct? My question is this, how can you get 1:1 close ups without moving the coral around? I understand (correct me if I am wrong) that you need to be close to 4 inches from the subject to get 1:1. What lenses are you people using? What distance are you shooting from the subject, and what suggestions/links can you share with me?

A few pics to share

90OcReef — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:41:20 GMT

Just a few pictures we've taken in the past few months. Camera is a Nikon 995.

Midas Blenny

Double Sea Star

Elegance

Dendro

Dragonface Pipe

Two-Spot Blenny

Monticulosa

single best SETTING advice for aquarium photogs

Anthony Calfo — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 05:56:16 GMT

if I had to pick a single tip to impart to aquarium photog friends... it is white balance. If you can do a custom white balance setting on your camera, please do - every time. The trueness of color in your images will be extraordinarily better! Without buying a photogs grey card, you can simply keep a bright white plastic lid (like from aquarium supplements) in your camera bag and shoot a pic of that as an example for your camera computer to set custom white balance from in each new lighting environ.

The auto white balance and the presets (sunny, cloudy, incandessant, etc) are useless under skewed aquarium lighting.

The autoWB especially since the camera searches for the lightest part of each image and calls it white - whether it is or not - essentially. So all other colors for that pic are skewed on that corrupted presumption. Generalizing a bit here... but you get the point.

Setting a custom white balance takes about 2 clicks and 4 seconds. Do invest that time for tremendously better aquarium photography

some ???s about shooting

govenor — Sat, 24 Mar 2007 19:16:31 GMT

How do you get rid of the blueness in the aquarium shots? I only have 10k type lighting but still some of my pics come out with an overall seagreen tint without using the flash.

I also have an issue with my macro lense. If i get close, i can only focus in on a part of the coral, say the front. I want to have the entire piece in focus, but nothing else.

This pic kinda shows my probs. The front of the ric is in focus, but the back isn't. And this isn't the true color of it, the pic has a overal seagreen tint to it.

couple of macro shots

clippo — Sat, 24 Mar 2007 14:36:47 GMT

shot at the LFS as usual....

Clownfish...

Boxing Shrimp

Both shot with usual kit - Canon 350 plus Tamron 90 and flash.

Any comments welcome!

jawfish

clippo — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:49:33 GMT

I'd love one of these but my tank isn't suitable unfortunately....

Chromatic aberration

MattTVI — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 08:51:57 GMT

you can learn more about it here.

here's an example from my library...

notice the border between the black and white on the clown.

excellent share and review photo website

Anthony Calfo — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 15:53:26 GMT

An excellent share and review photo website, compliments of Jack at BIOREEF in FL:

www.photosig.com

Camera distance to the glass

adagosto — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 19:19:53 GMT

Hello.

I have a question about how far away to shoot from the glass (or acrylic).

I recall from Calfo’s first issue that getting right up against the glass gave the best conditions for taking pictures of the aquarium.

However, my camera/lens just can’t focus that close. And my experience thus far has show the best distance to be about 2 feet away.

My question is if my camera/lens setup were to be able to get right up against the glass, would my pictures improve? Is the point of getting close just to reduce or eliminate stray light or is there something else going on?

I have included a couple of pictures for you to critique.

Thanks,

Adam