Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You mean this test?
web.jpg


Yep, looks like about 8mm or so of apparent focus- was the spider at the same aperture and/or handheld?
 
Yep, looks like about 8mm or so of apparent focus- was the spider at the same aperture and/or handheld?

No at F5 at 250.
I always shoot on a tripod and use a remote shutter release. (for ruler and flies)
I don't lock the mirror.
This is my light source and light box made from 2mm coroplast (for the back) and depron (foam for the front).
Softbox-side.jpg

How do you get such sharp pics?
 
Sorry, I actually meant was the fly hand-held- however I'd recommend MLU as you may be getting some harmonic vibration in there- worth a test anyway.

No the fly is held by tweezers, then held by a clamp. What is MLU?
 
Here's an example of an Nikon image from an Coolpix camera. I struggle to do this good. With a SLR! The second is one I shot with my 20D
web.jpg

web.jpg

Is this just a depth of field issue? Other than the legs being out of focus, the 2nd image looks fine. :confused:

Anyway, the problem may be a poorly calibrated lens. The 70-200 mm f/4 is supposed to be VERY sharp....one of Canon's sharpest zoom lenses. It should be sharper than the 70-200 mm f/2.8 model, which is already sharp. The difference between Canon and Nikon isn't sharpness. If you don't get sharp images with a Canon, you won't get them with a Nikon either.
 
If you shoot macros on a tripod and that studio stuff, you might find Helicon Focus useful for combining many images with a shallow DOF into one with a large DOF. That way you can get sharp images by shooting at larger apertures, no diffraction and a large DOF for your pics.

(DISCLAIMER: I haven't actually tried it, but from what I've read it's pretty good.)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.