My head aches.

Do some of the newer camera have modes that already factor in for "depth of Field?"
I "assume" Macro does as does perhaps landscaper???

Depth of Field, DOF is the prize in macro. There tends not to be very much since you are so close to the subject. You can see how short the DOF is with my Cybershot in macro mode in the picture. Manipulating f-stops and shutter speed and using lenses specifically for macro will get you more. With my new camera, Nikon DSLR - D3200 I have a bit more DOF with the normal lens but not much more.

Forgot to add something. The link below is to the original picture. It's 20 megs in size. In reducing the image for ATP I lost a lot of resolution.

http://www.xeramtheum.com/Gerb...

Oh wow!!! georgeous!!! And which of your cameras did you use for that one?

valleylynn said: Question. After seeing that beautiful photo of a zinnia/dahlia?, how would you get a depth of field that would show the detail from the front to the back of the flower. All of it in perfect focus.

Exactly. "All of it" --whatever I want--in perfect focus! The Quest that led to my edification about f-stops and depth of field.
Part of me wants to explain why you can't have "all of it" in perfect focus, but maybe you can
I shared how and what I learned in the thread
The thread "How I learned about f-stops" in Photography Tips & Techniques forum
meanwhile, this isn't a macro or even a close up, but rather I am about seven feet away from this mum with just a bit of morning sun coming thru the giant tree and this is cropped from the larger image

f/13; 1/400sec; ISO-200; 240mm (360mm)

Regarding weedwhacker's question about macro lenses--I don't have one yet but I'm getting one soon (I hope) because I want one! There must be an advantage over the zoom lens that I have been using and I'm anxious to find out

Swoon.

Double swoon.
That is beautiful Dirtdolphin.
On my way to read the link you posted.

I am learning after getting over the hurting head. This is my first attempt after reading around the threads here (lighting and focusing) with my first attempt at composing with the rule of thirds. Daylily people probably would have seen these already.

This is from my new indoor photo studio It's a NoID fuchsia I love (and thought I'd lost until this just started blooming) No thirds here, and with the smaller Canon PhotoShot, but the colors are very close to true. Interestingly, when I asked PhotoShop to correct it to "autolevels" (I don't usually like what that does but it's interesting to check) everything turned blue... Like a little old lady who overdid the blueing shampoo! MR

Nice photo. The background detracts slightly only because it has a similar lightness as the subject.

The photo was taken at ISO 80, aperture f/5, speed 1/60s, and the flash did fire.

dave said:Nice photo. The background detracts slightly only because it has a similar lightness as the subject.

The photo was taken at ISO 80, aperture f/5, speed 1/60s, and the flash did fire.

Dave, Yes, I should have stuck with the green wall instead of thinking white would improve it. How do you know the "specs?" MR

One can view the jpg image and use software on their desktop to view the EXIF data and see what information is present. The camera records all the "specs" into the image itself.

dave said:One can view the jpg image and use software on their desktop to view the EXIF data and see what information is present. The camera records all the "specs" into the image itself.

If you're using Windows, save the photo, right click on and select "properties" - then click the "details" tab - lots of good info in there.

So on a roll here, and I have to grab time when I can find it. The sun was just coming around to my front garden and I had trouble seeing what the camera was trying to tell me with the light on it, but I managed to get these shots:

This is the Semp that was sold to me as Atroviolaceum but Kevin says it can't be...

Semp Lone Star

"Rollers from Hirta"

I have some pictures of my seedlings for Lynn but they'd better go in another post. They were caught in morning sun/shadow, but the focus is about the best I've gotten for these little guys... MR

Here are the seedlings, Lynn. They really are small and I'm looking forward to having another lens to help me focus in on them - it takes a jeweler's loupe to see some of the smaller ones!

I remembered about putting an object in for scale at the very end, just before the chapel bell, so hopefully next time I'll remember to get a coin in my pocket and use it from the start . I'm grateful for the forum -- one thing at a time here! At least these have a pretty good focus... MR

MR, you are amazing at how fast your photos have been improving. Who needs a jeweler's loupe when they can take photos like those and enlarge them. Better than a jeweler's loupe.

Now try what Anne posted about pulling back a bit from the subject, so you will have a larger area of focus. I tried that a few days ago. I was amazed at how the entire colony of semps seemed to be in focus. Not just one or two of the rosettes.

i have a macro lens, but mounting and dismounting it is a pain! i mostly use it for ultra dark shots/fish-eye to fit very high objects/buildings in the frame, in the dark...
and i make sure that i have a decent inter-changeable zoom-lens for my camera. but not too big either, or i just wont lug it around...
for macros, it really helps if you have a zoom lens. i have a digital zoom too in addition - to get an even closer shot. but what often happens, my camera due to light or other factors has a difficulty focusing in full zoom + digital zoom mode. IF your camera can get a good resolution pic - somewhere in the 3.5-4.2 meg area, you actually don't need to go to macro (where you'll get a very shallow depth-of-field), just take a pic close enough but not super close. you can then crop the image and enlarge it without loosing resolution - and there you'll have your pic AND macro too!
so try to stay back a little and then enlarge and crop on the computer to see if your camera can do it.

That is helpful. I have a macro setting on one camera and a macro or super macro on another. They are "bridge cameras" (cheaper than full funcion DSLRs) but with some nice features. They do not use add on lens but have built in choices.

I was taking OK pictures with them until I got all twisted with "depth of field" and fstop concerns. Now I am getting discouraged. Hate to admit it but...

Try the f stops over winter when you can practice in the comfort of your own home without gardening pressures. It's just easier to get used to the numbers. If you just memorize the lowest f stop lets in the most light you won't have to be too concerned.

This helped me a lot!