Re: Equipment for extreme macro
oneofone25 wrote:
ZilverHaylide wrote:
I appreciate that you said that you didn't notice any problems with focus-bracketing step-size on your Canon. But unless you ran the same detailed tests that Jim Kasson does, what you did or didn't notice is no guarantee. With the Nikon Z7, plenty of people were satisfied with the results of its bracketing algorithm, Kasson didn't say that people weren't ever satisfied with the results, he said, based on careful testing, that the step size was too big for critical work.
Too big for critical work at 1:1 ??
Kasson wants a maximum CoC diameter of 1 pixel pitch or less. That's critical indeed!
He found a CoC size of 1 micrometer or less for the Fujifilm GFX 100 at the finest setting. Even he regards that as probably too fine.
Unfortunately, he doesn't present the data for the Z7. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it, and I would just use it if I had one. For what it's worth, his tests were apparently not done at macro distances.
There's been some fuss about whether Canon cameras have small enough steps. I thought you might like to see an example. The following focus stack was made with a Canon M6 Mark II, with EF-S 60 mm f/2.8 macro lens, at 1:1 magnification and nominally f/2.8. The camera was angled down at 30 degrees from the horizontal. The marks on the ruler are millimeters. From top to bottom: (1), (2), the first two exposures; (3) the 44th exposure; and (4) a focus stack made with DPP4.
Do you think that's fine enough? I would say it's too fine. Based on my tests, I would have absolutely no reservation about using my Canon for focus stacking.
1st exposure
2nd exposure
44th exposure
Focus stack