But you would not shoot corals at 400mm.. it's better with a smaller lens from closer or a macro lens. My 400mm focus at 12 feet...so I would not even be able to take a photo of the aquarium without hitting the wall.

I did tons of macro of insects and never used a tripod and with the aquarium and either LED or MH, the light is so strong that getting the speed to get sharp photos is not a problem. If there is blur from the motion of the person, usually there is not enough speed and the coral will be blurred if it is moving, at least the polyps will.

If you use a slow shutter, you might get blurry pic tripod or not.

It all depends on the shutter speed.

You can get a lot closer to an insect when there isn't a wall of glass in the way though :razz:
I've got wicked shots of insects with my cam or even phone, but any shots I take of stuff in my tank are junk cause they are 10-20" back.
*above comments without tripod*

As im sure you know, the degree of movement of the image in the lens is amplified as you get further away from it. Shaking 1/10th of a milimeter up close and it doesnt look like much, but shooting something 20 inches away is very visible. Yes the camera (or settings) might be able to compensate for it, but the less movement, the less chance for light to be 'diverted incorrectly' or 'misinterpreted'. I may know little about cameras, but these are basic physics principles.

and I thought I hijacked threads :wink:

No not really, where did you get that? The movement is amplified with the longer focal, but if you shoot from 4" with a 100mm lens, that will not change your exposure usually and will not be worse than if you shoot at 20 inches. I was shooting macros of things even at 3 feet because a dragonfly is quite large, opposite to a tiny fly.

shaking at 1/10 of a mm? does that exist? or did you mean 1/10th of a second? Because I am not aware of any camera that can focus that close!

I think you are confusing between shutter speed and focal length or distance to subject.

My macro lens was having a minimum focusing distance of 12 inches. It was not possible to use it closer to that. Now with my small Kodak Playsport I can get as close as 5", but it does not matter if I am 5" or 20" away...same thing because same ligting and same shutter speed and ISO.

What you are describing are not basic photo principle. Basic principles in photography is, the shake is amplified by the slower shutter speed, the higher focal and the higher F number and a lower ISO.

It is not the distance to the subject at all, that has no influence. The only thing that can influence the distance to subject and render a photo unsharp is the atmospheric haze outside.

Here is a bug at minimum focusing distance but at 1/200th of a secon to create motion on the wings:

http://i.pbase.com/v3/84/9684/1/4775...MG_581801s.jpg

Here is one taken at 3 feet distance. at 1/1000s of a second everything was sharp, including the wing motion because that dragonfly was in flight and flapping very fast:

http://i.pbase.com/u35/zylen/upload/....IMG_8773s.jpg

So as you can see here it is the shutter speed that freeze the motion, not the distance to subject. NO matter how far I would be from the subject. Of course at some point I would be too far and would get no detail in the subject, but that's another story and that does not apply to aquarium.

I never used a tripod to do my macro shots and rarely had blur.

But enough for the basic 101 photography course :)

To the original poster, if you don't want to share pics or show them, that's ok, at least take some for yourself so that you can check the coral growth later on...it is fun to watch later :)


Sorry for the off topic

:focus:

Ya WTF batman? this isnt taking pics 101

lol, I was thinking the same thing. I will have some pictures posted on my comparison by next week.

FINALLY THERE ON!!! Heres a shot of 4 SOL blues @ 100%
http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j1...aangel/001.jpg

what size of tank and how many MH before?