DIY Ring-Flash with build imgs and sample shots...

[mstal]

Thanks,  I am using a canon 100 mm macro lens.  I don't use a noise removal program.  These pictures were processed with c1 into jpeg.  I adjusted contrast very slight sharpening and saturation and that was it.  I use as high a f-stop as I can for the depth of field. 

[motleypixel]

So I'm sitting here in the office at lunch break reading your reply and the first thing to pop into my head was to graph IQ vs. f-stop.  Now, I don't have a lab and this white-board sketch is not accurate; in fact, it's probably a little too conservative on f-stop, but I personally feel that I can tell a difference in image fidelity (IQ) between f/11 and f/16 for given static focal length, magnification, shutter speed and ISO, particularly the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens.

Essentially it's sort of like the law of diminishing returns with regard to IQ and f-stop.  Essentially the DOF increase with f-stop is non-linear.  You've sort-of have to find the "sweet spot".  For me, the extra little 1mm gain of DOF at f/16 isn't worth the higher diffraction or lower IQ.

[mstal]

So you are saying f-8 is the sweet spot?

[motleypixel]

Actually I think 7.1 is the sharpest point, see here:  http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon100f28macro/tloader.htm  slide the aperture bar and the closest the plane of intelengence on the sensor to pink the sharper the image...notice how the edges get soft first as you open up to 2.8. 

Now, 7.1 or 8 isn't the sweet spot for 1:1 macro...it's a combination of returns on DOF and IQ.  Honestly if you look at the exif of a lot of "good" macro shooters that shoot 1:1 you see a lot of f/9-f/13 usage.  Make sense?

-Roy

[mstal]

Thanks, I'll give it a try :-)

[motleypixel]

It's not the be-all end all...it all comes down to taste and also what magnification you shoot at.  Remember I'm referencing 1:1, generally as your mag goes up you'll what a higher f-stop, but generally at 2-5X I see not much more that f/16.  Now I shoot less than 1:1 a lot and in these cases I get really sharp nice images at f/8 to f/9.  For example, this one is at f/6.3 oh and also with the DIY Ring Flash (no idea what the mag is but is far less than 1:1).



-Roy

[BCR686]

Great tutorial Motley! What do you think about using the CTR-301 instead of the cord? Would that work?

[motleypixel]

BCR,

Welcome to the motleypixel.  Well it would work, but it would most likely result in a miss-fire from time to time and/or random triggers w/o the shutter released.  Plus it's an extra set of batteries to worry about.  Cord is light enough and the distance is short.  It's never gotten in the way.

-Roy

[mstal]

I have not tried it on model yet, but did play with it yesterday taking halloween pictures.  Here are a couple.  I wanted to see what kind of range I could get with it.  I couls have also, bumped up the exposure in the raw processing but didn't.

[motleypixel]

Not bad...scary looking critter.

-Roy

[BCR686]

So I just got all of the parts and I'm in the process of building mine. I was browsing youtube and came across something almost identical called, "The Orbis". Six pages of comments and no one has mentioned anything about it. Looking at it though is getting brain really thinking of how and what modifications I can do with the DIY one. Let's here some of your thoughts.

Here are some links on the Orbis:

Site - http://www.orbisflash.com/wawcs0130714/tn-home.html

YouTube videos - http://www.youtube.com/user/enlightphoto

[EDIT]
Still browsing the web, I think I found the O.G. of the DIY ring flash, David Tejada. Check it it out(scroll down some) - http://davidtejada.blogspot.com/search/label/DIY

[motleypixel]

BCR,

Thanks for the links...this helps out a lot in the creativity part of building one of these...there is almost unlimited mods you can do.  Also, I do mention the place I got the idea in my OP (original post, first page) with a link.  I like the davidtejada version a lot but it's going to cost you a bit more with the triggers and ball joints...will probably be a little heavier too.

-Roy

[js09]

Great tutorial, I'm going to get the materials I don't already have this week.

I read all all the replies, but how will this work with a non macro (specifically the canon 100mm macro) lens?

I've got a tamron 17-50mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8II, and 70-200L 2.8.. i'm thinking the 17-50mm would be my best bet but just wanted to see what you suggest.

thanks!

[motleypixel]

Thanks for joining js09...we hope to see some test shots and product shots later if possible.  I would suggest putting your 17-50 at 17 wide and essentially take your vent reducer and place it over your lens and move it such that you don't get any vignetting maybe even make it vignette and then move it just about 1/4" forward and mark that position...then zoom to 50mm at that position and the barrel may extend beyond the reducer a bit and just be sure it doesn't cast any shadows.

-Roy

[js09]

Thanks for joining js09...we hope to see some test shots and product shots later if possible.  I would suggest putting your 17-50 at 17 wide and essentially take your vent reducer and place it over your lens and move it such that you don't get any vignetting maybe even make it vignette and then move it just about 1/4" forward and mark that position...then zoom to 50mm at that position and the barrel may extend beyond the reducer a bit and just be sure it doesn't cast any shadows.

-Roy

Thanks for the suggestion, i'll be sure to post some shots when I get it up and running.