The Problem with Close Up Shots

I have tried all kinds of close ups, and none of them were really worth much. What is the problem? What was I doing wrong? The flowers were not crisp. The rocks were dull. Just about everything lacked the detail that makes this kind of shot so compelling and breathtaking.

Well, I sure hope this is not just some excuse, but I really think the solution to all my bad close up photos is my lenses. My lenses are not really made for this. I have a 50mm f/1.4 with a closest focusing distance of 1.5ft (0.45m), and an 85mm f/1.8 with a closest focusing distance of 3ft (0.85m). I think that is my problem. I just cannot get close enough.

First, I guess we should address the silly way close up photography is usually labeled: macro photography. That just does not make any sense to me: “macro” encompasses a large or broad area. I always thought this should be called micro photography.

Then, just when I thought I was the only one with this problem, I took a look through a Nikon lens brochure, where they call their close up lenses “Micro Nikkors”, and the style of photography they call “close up and macro shooting”. They even make the letter i in micro a different color to bring out the purposeful use of i instead of a. Actually, the brochure uses both words in the text, but it seems they use them differently, as if there is a subtle difference which has to do with the reproduction ratio (wow, big words). I have not quite figured that out. Anyway, back to our original question…

So, with no success taking really close up, detailed shots, let say of a flower, I have just backed off a little. Instead of digging into the details of the flower, I have taken a photo with a flower in it as the main subject. This is not really macro/micro photography. It is nice, but not the same.

Here is a photo demonstrating my point. This is as close as I can get. I would like to move another foot closer.

When digging through the specifications page at the back of the Nikon brochure, I think the whole micro/macro game comes down to a lens’s maximum reproduction ratio. To see what I am talking about, we could compare Nikon’s micro lenses’ ratio of 1:1 or 1:2 to my 50mm’s ratio of 1:6.8 and my 85mm’s ratio of 1:9.2! So, there is a little difference there.

Am I going to go buy a new lens just to take photos of flowers? Nope. Now, some would, but that is just not my photographic focus, so it is not really a need for me. So, what can I do with what I have?

One thing I want to try that would probably help my detail problem is playing with the f/stop. I cannot get clear details, but if I remember correctly, I was shooting at a very large f/stop. If I close down the f/stop, I will open up the depth of field, gain a lot more detail, and likely capture a nice, crisp close up shot.

So, for me, not having a micro lens, like the majority of the folks out there who just want to take a photo of that dashingly beautiful flower, I suggest moving that f/stop to a bigger number. I am going to play around with it and see what different f/stops to for me.