Hairy Eyball.jpg

 

 

The above is a pic taken with a camera with lower specification than yours and same type as yours with the addition of a 2.5X Raynox macro lens.

 

With your camera the results would be much better.

 

Most people are under the misconception that to take good pictures you need to spend mega bucks, that is not so, and that notion only stifles creativity and adapting what you have to achieve what you want to achieve.

 

The camera was a Nikon Coolpix 5700, 5 mega pixel, 8X zoom, an  adaptor tube and an addon 2.5X Raynox macro lens.

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

that's a great photo, i took some this afternoon and I will post them on this thread later tonight.

ok

 

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

P1100603.JPG

P1100706.JPG

P1100717.JPG

P1100731.JPG


@boris1gary wrote:

P1100603.JPG


Well done that is a pretty difficult subject but you have managed it well 🙂

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

The third one was the easier of them. You have managed them all pretty well.

 

They were difficult because of the depth of field is wide.

 

Any idea what your settings were?

 

for subjects like those you need to use a small aperture setting, but to do that you need lots of light or a tripod and nothing moving.

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

By the way, your camera , as it is, is limited to a distance from the subject of 300 mm.

 

You can get closer with an add on lens like the Ranox Macro lens

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.