Jump to content

The Official Head-Case Photography Thread.


Knuckledragger

Recommended Posts

I for one have less than no interest in a 24MP APS-C sensor. The Megapixel war is as bad as the loudness war, IMJO. I'd much rather have a 12MP full frame sensor. In fact, I made use of one a couple weeks ago.

6071897699_d58e856664_b.jpg

The country's oldest continually operation town hall.

6034209135_4b6137689d_b.jpg

The door to the above.

6015482499_204b369d89_b.jpg

Poker players. The guy on the right is a pretty damn good photographer himself.

6040910162_dd467b2664_b.jpg

Using my manual focus Nikon E-Series 75-150mm F/3.5 zoom.

6054716583_7051406e3c_b.jpg

Have you been drinking? You look blurry.

6057731417_f2c45fc062_b.jpg

35mm F/2, 0.4sec, ISO1600.

6044692490_db479d0e37_b.jpg

Not a spectacular shot, but truly a spectacular automobile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been thinking of getting a macro lens lately. I know the Nikon 105mm is supposed to be the shit but don't want to spend 1K. Some complain that you have to get too close with the Nikon 60mm (scaring bugs away) so I have been thinking about the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 and Tokina 100mm f/2.8. Anyone have any experience with either of these lenses (or just Tamron/Tokina lenses in general)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

shelly, have you considered an extension tube? i just got one to play around with for the nex 5 - just wanted to see what it did and whether i enjoyed looking at pictures of things that up close. the ones with electronic contacts get expensive but the one i got is just an empty plastic shell - cost me $10. couldnt really not give it a try even if i never use it again. while not really a macro lens, it just moves the lens farther away from the sensor resulting in vaguely similar results. havent had much time to play around with it but initial toying around yielded some surprising results. following were shot with the nex 5 + zeiss 35mm. all hand held in piss poor light so shutter speeds were ~1/30 secondsish.

post-826-0-36791700-1314399635_thumb.jpg

post-826-0-13310700-1314399690_thumb.jpg

post-826-0-89734700-1314399710_thumb.jpg

post-826-0-20792100-1314399733_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I absolutely love my Nikon 60 mm macro. While it is true you have to be closer to get comparable magnification compared to the 105, it has a better edge to edge flatness of field, less edge aberration and is capable of superior sharpness IMO. My opinion is based upon side-by-side comparisons for imaging of mammalian skulls. I have used it for macro imaging of live subjects capable of movement and have never felt exceptionally hindered by the need to be slightly closer.

Edited by morphsci
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On APS-C the 60mm isn't too unreasonable (in terms of having to get close), especially if you get the newer AF-S version, which focuses internally (and hence does not grow in length as you focus closer). The AF-S 60 macro is also excellent at normal and even infinity focus, so if that would be a useful focal length for you, I'd go for it.

The Tamron and Tokina options both get great reviews from users. I've not used either. It's safe to say that the Tokina would be better built. Sigma also makes some great macro lenses (50, 70, 105, 150). Their 70mm is possibly the best looking lens I've ever seen in empirical tests.

The macro lens I use is the Sigma 150, which is fabulous both for macro and general telephoto use. I've taken great landscapes, portraits, and close-ups with it. I'd highly recommend it, but it's probably too long on DX. On FX, the focal length is very useful for a variety of subjects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigma also makes some great macro lenses (50, 70, 105, 150). Their 70mm is possibly the best looking lens I've ever seen in empirical tests.

I currently have the Canon 100 L Macro but would have no qualms about still recommending Sigma 70 Macro, even over Canon. That Sigma 70 is something else for Macro but also very useful length on crop for all kinds of uses. Before buying, however, I would google around to make sure your particular camera body has no issues with the Sigma. My 550d simply did not work in live view with Sigma, and live view is actually quite useful for Macro.

I use extension tubes, too, and they are great. But you get very little control over size of objects in the frame as there is a very small range of distance where the extension tube/lens can focus. So you can end up with larger-than-you-wanted object sizes in the frame, cutting off sides, etc. Autofocus also works VERY slowly/poorly, basically unuseable with extension tubes, and here is where a true macro lens has a large advantage if using AF. I do use MF most of the time, but there are times AF comes in handly in Macro, especially if the subject is moving.

Then there's the whole greater-than 1:1 Macro world with extension tubes on true macro lenses, reversed lenses, etc. Fun stuff but now tripods become absolutely mandatory and lighting more crucial.

Edited by Jon L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Travel pics from a trip to Seattle last week/end. The weather was really nice - no rain and unexpectedly warm (75-ish average every day for the 5 days I was there). I think I'm officially all traveled out for the year now. wink.png

#1 - Museum of Flight

#2 - Argosy boat cruise

#3 - someone's tiny dog at a bar I hopped into one night - and as far as bar experiences go, that night was unexpectedly awesome btw (there was a Canadian, a South African, and another guy from Minnesota I think - plus 2 sassy female bartenders)

#4 - downtown at night

#5 - Pacific Science Center

#6 - I forgot the camera was on a long exposure at the Space Needle and destabilized it accidentally tongue.png

#7 - Mt Rainier from the Space Needle

#8 - sunset over Puget Sound, from the Space Needle

#9 - Kerry Park

#10 - Experience Music Project & Sci Fi Museum

post-893-0-59074500-1314516479_thumb.jpg post-893-0-89684700-1314516486_thumb.jpg post-893-0-25399200-1314516492_thumb.jpg post-893-0-01102800-1314516499_thumb.jpg post-893-0-95660700-1314516505_thumb.jpg post-893-0-34866000-1314516515_thumb.jpg post-893-0-01741600-1314516522_thumb.jpg post-893-0-13323100-1314516527_thumb.jpg post-893-0-97600400-1314516532_thumb.jpg post-893-0-33226700-1314516539_thumb.jpg

Edited by Asr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love my s95. It is plenty small enough and the picture quality is very good. If I really want better I have to break out one of the DSLRs. The way I look at it is that those pictures are once-in-a-lifetime events so I want a camera that I will have with me but that is still capable of taking great pictures in less-than-perfect conditions. If you do decide on the s90/95 make sure to spend the extra bucks on the Franiac grip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some pics from this weekend, from a local air show that I was able to attend for free. smile.png I rented the Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 for the occasion and it worked out ok, but as things turned out, it was a bit on the short side.

post-893-0-32661700-1314601742_thumb.jpg post-893-0-65539400-1314601746_thumb.jpg post-893-0-54606400-1314601749_thumb.jpg post-893-0-80760500-1314601753_thumb.jpg post-893-0-62604000-1314601758_thumb.jpg post-893-0-86313100-1314601761_thumb.jpg post-893-0-56078200-1314601764_thumb.jpg

I like the space needle night shot, Steve!

Thanks Peter, was pretty hard to get that one aligned actually - almost all of my other attempts came out slightly crooked (I was using a Gorillapod Focus, which I got after you mentioned, earlier in this thread).

Edited by Asr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Which is bit disappointing considering the sensor in D7000 is at least one-year-old at this point (and 7D is what, two-years-old at this point?).

I still wonder how much bigger NEX bodies would have been if they'd included in-body stabilization, allowing for lenses to be smaller. Their lens size still kills the idea they're far more portable than other APS-C sensor interchangeable-lens cameras (not that they could ever reach the size of m4/3 lenses).

Edited by Salt Peanuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.