Digital Art Zone

 
   
3 of 5
3
Photos by Tako
Posted: 29 May 2012 04:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  168
Joined  2010-09-21
Vaskania - 29 May 2012 03:19 PM

Those cat photos are great. I can already see a difference between your previous cam and the Nikon. Your cat’s green eyes provide some really good contrast in the ‘portrait’ shot.


Thanks for the support!


Funnily enough, I miss my 20mm Lumix lens for closeups. It handles low light much better without high ISO/flash.
The portrait is actually a crop from a full body shot.


Also, the lens I am using with the nikon can do macro but you have to put the camera super close,
almost touching the subject, lol.
I wonder if there is something I can add to the camera to make it possible to take macro shots farther away. O.o

 Signature 

My DAZ Store
My Freebies

New Reality Tutorial - Ultra-realistic displacement in Reality

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2012 06:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  168
Joined  2010-09-21

Some I did today…

Image Attachments
rain3_800.jpg
spider_800.jpg
flower_cluster4_800.jpg
 Signature 

My DAZ Store
My Freebies

New Reality Tutorial - Ultra-realistic displacement in Reality

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2012 08:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4999
Joined  2005-08-03
Tako Yakida - 29 May 2012 04:43 PM

Funnily enough, I miss my 20mm Lumix lens for closeups. It handles low light much better without high ISO/flash.

The lens was probably able to go to a wider aperture than your current lens. Currently the widest aperture I can go to is F1.8 with my 50mm prime lens. I’d like to get a wide aperture capable telephoto at some point as well, but those get costly.

Tako Yakida - 29 May 2012 04:43 PM

I wonder if there is something I can add to the camera to make it possible to take macro shots farther away. O.o

Your raynox attachment on a telephoto lens. Just switch to manual focus and enjoy.

 Signature 

Wearing duck crap doesn’t make you a duck - Floki
@Deviantart | @ShareCG
Tutorial: V4 Transmap Brows on Genesis (DS)
Free Script: Bulk convert V4/M4 mats for Genesis2 (DS/Poser)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2012 09:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  168
Joined  2010-09-21
Vaskania - 29 May 2012 08:56 PM
Tako Yakida - 29 May 2012 04:43 PM

Funnily enough, I miss my 20mm Lumix lens for closeups. It handles low light much better without high ISO/flash.

The lens was probably able to go to a wider aperture than your current lens. Currently the widest aperture I can go to is F1.8 with my 50mm prime lens. I’d like to get a wide aperture capable telephoto at some point as well, but those get costly.


Yes, the 20mm could go to 1.7 but seemed to work better at its 2.8 than my nikon 2.8 lens. I probably won’t buy a 2.8 zoom unless I double my yearly income at some point. wink

 

Tako Yakida - 29 May 2012 04:43 PM

I wonder if there is something I can add to the camera to make it possible to take macro shots farther away. O.o

Your raynox attachment on a telephoto lens. Just switch to manual focus and enjoy.


I meant with my 40mm 2.8 lens. The Raynox was too hard for me to focus with its super tight DOF, which is why I bought the Nikon macro lens. :(

 

 Signature 

My DAZ Store
My Freebies

New Reality Tutorial - Ultra-realistic displacement in Reality

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2012 11:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4999
Joined  2005-08-03

With the 40mm, you can’t. If you wanted to stick to a prime macro lens, you’ll need to buy one with a longer focal length. There are extension tubes you can use between your camera body and the macro lens itself, but those just allow you to get closer to your subject without your camera freaking out and yelling at you to back up.

 Signature 

Wearing duck crap doesn’t make you a duck - Floki
@Deviantart | @ShareCG
Tutorial: V4 Transmap Brows on Genesis (DS)
Free Script: Bulk convert V4/M4 mats for Genesis2 (DS/Poser)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2012 11:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  168
Joined  2010-09-21

That is unfortunate. Thank you for the fast response. smile

 Signature 

My DAZ Store
My Freebies

New Reality Tutorial - Ultra-realistic displacement in Reality

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2012 11:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4999
Joined  2005-08-03

Also, with regards to the Raynox, it can be a bit of a pain, but I didn’t go for the 250 as you did, I only went for the 150. The 250 has a shallower DOF than the 150 so it allows less of the object into the frame. You CAN achieve the DOF of the 250 with the 150 by zooming in a little, but you can’t achieve 150 results with the 250.

 Signature 

Wearing duck crap doesn’t make you a duck - Floki
@Deviantart | @ShareCG
Tutorial: V4 Transmap Brows on Genesis (DS)
Free Script: Bulk convert V4/M4 mats for Genesis2 (DS/Poser)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2012 12:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  168
Joined  2010-09-21

Well, I’ve decided to return my 40mm and try an 85mm. The focusing distance is 0.9 feet instead of smashed up against the subject like the 40mm.

 Signature 

My DAZ Store
My Freebies

New Reality Tutorial - Ultra-realistic displacement in Reality

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2012 02:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4999
Joined  2005-08-03

If the 85mm still doesn’t work out for you, check out the Sigma 70-300mm macro telephoto. It can be used as both.
http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-300mm-4-5-6-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B000ALLMI8/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1338367448&sr=1-2

This thread @ flickr shows the macro capabilities:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/_sigma_af_70-300mm_f4-56_dg_apo_macro/discuss/72157603499463082/

The group photos have a lot of telephoto shots:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/_sigma_af_70-300mm_f4-56_dg_apo_macro/pool/

I don’t have this lens.
I’ve only read reviews and seen photos taken with it.



/edited-
Changed link to APO version of the lens.

 Signature 

Wearing duck crap doesn’t make you a duck - Floki
@Deviantart | @ShareCG
Tutorial: V4 Transmap Brows on Genesis (DS)
Free Script: Bulk convert V4/M4 mats for Genesis2 (DS/Poser)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2012 06:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Active Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  495
Joined  2004-06-12

Don’t take this as factual, because I don’t know a whole lot about lenses and I might have misunderstood it, but, one of the reasons you might not be enjoying macro on the Nikon could be down to the size of the sensor when compared to the Olympus.


One of the things I picked up on during a conversation was that a smaller sensor is better for macro.  I picked this up from Bjorn who has a D700 full-frame model.  Despite having that full-frame, he was considering a D7000 (which has a smaller sensor than the D700), and if I recall it was because it would be better for macro work.


So, what I’m saying is perhaps for macro work, your Olympus was generally a better setup due to the sensor size, and to match it, you might have to do a bit of maths and work out the correct lens (which is what Vaskania probably just did).  But there is definitely something in the sensor size to lens that makes a massive difference.  For example, if you want to shoot really wide, then you’re better off with a full-frame model, wheres an APS-C model has an advantage if you want to shoot telephoto.


Your Olympus has an even greater advantage if you want to shoot telephoto, because the sensor is smaller still.  Perhaps this effect is why you feel like you’re being forced right up to the object you’re trying to photograph.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2012 04:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  168
Joined  2010-09-21
Vaskania - 30 May 2012 02:38 AM

If the 85mm still doesn’t work out for you, check out the Sigma 70-300mm macro telephoto. It can be used as both.
http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-300mm-4-5-6-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B000ALLMI8/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1338367448&sr=1-2

This thread @ flickr shows the macro capabilities:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/_sigma_af_70-300mm_f4-56_dg_apo_macro/discuss/72157603499463082/

The group photos have a lot of telephoto shots:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/_sigma_af_70-300mm_f4-56_dg_apo_macro/pool/

I don’t have this lens.
I’ve only read reviews and seen photos taken with it.



/edited-
Changed link to APO version of the lens.


Thanks. I checked out various sigma and tamron macro/telephotos but I am just not liking the macro results. For example, from the link you gave me: http://www.flickr.com/photos/51152370@N06/7303785490/in/pool-90618367@N00/ the image just looks kind of blocky to me. Most people might not notice but I am very picky. The Sigma also doesn’t seem to have autofocus or image stabilization. (My Nikon body does not have either function built-in so relies on the lens for them.) What I really need is pro-level lenses, lol.

 

pumeco - 30 May 2012 06:30 AM

Don’t take this as factual, because I don’t know a whole lot about lenses and I might have misunderstood it, but, one of the reasons you might not be enjoying macro on the Nikon could be down to the size of the sensor when compared to the Olympus.


One of the things I picked up on during a conversation was that a smaller sensor is better for macro.  I picked this up from Bjorn who has a D700 full-frame model.  Despite having that full-frame, he was considering a D7000 (which has a smaller sensor than the D700), and if I recall it was because it would be better for macro work.


So, what I’m saying is perhaps for macro work, your Olympus was generally a better setup due to the sensor size, and to match it, you might have to do a bit of maths and work out the correct lens (which is what Vaskania probably just did).  But there is definitely something in the sensor size to lens that makes a massive difference.  For example, if you want to shoot really wide, then you’re better off with a full-frame model, wheres an APS-C model has an advantage if you want to shoot telephoto.


Your Olympus has an even greater advantage if you want to shoot telephoto, because the sensor is smaller still.  Perhaps this effect is why you feel like you’re being forced right up to the object you’re trying to photograph.


I appreciate the input. I shoot a variety of stuff as you have seen and the Olympus is really slow to auto focus and handle when shooting birds. It’s great for closeups of still things using the 20mm 1.7 Lumix lens or even the kit lens.


I didn’t like my Olympus too much with the 45-200mm Lumix plus Raynox macro 2.5 because of the super tight DOF. IIRC the focus distance on my 200mm end with the Raynox clipped on became around 6 inches or so. I looked at an actual micro-four thirds macro lens just now and its focus is at about 150mm or around 5.9 inches but oddly enough can be changed to 500mm or 19.7 inches. Looks like a nice lens but a bit more expensive than I want to spend.


In any case, the 85mm for nikon I am looking at’s focus distance is 0.9 feet or 10.8 inches. Both the 40mm and 85mm nikon lenses offer true 1:1 magnification but the 40mm’s zoom range to get that magnification is like 1.3 inches. With the 1.5x crop factor 40mm = 60mm on a 35mm camera. On an Olympus, 40mm = 80mm with the 2.0 crop factor but the 85mm nikon = 127.5mm. It’s not too hard to figure out so I’m not worried about that so much as I am narrowness of DOF.

 Signature 

My DAZ Store
My Freebies

New Reality Tutorial - Ultra-realistic displacement in Reality

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2012 10:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4999
Joined  2005-08-03
Tako Yakida - 30 May 2012 04:50 PM

Thanks. I checked out various sigma and tamron macro/telephotos but I am just not liking the macro results. For example, from the link you gave me: http://www.flickr.com/photos/51152370@N06/7303785490/in/pool-90618367@N00/ the image just looks kind of blocky to me. Most people might not notice but I am very picky. The Sigma also doesn’t seem to have autofocus or image stabilization. (My Nikon body does not have either function built-in so relies on the lens for them.) What I really need is pro-level lenses, lol.

You cannot rely on all photos for an accurate lens review. Some people just don’t know what the hell they’re doing. If there ARE good photos with a lens, then you know it’s possible and can pretty much dismiss the poor quality photos. With autofocus, I don’t use it for macros anyways (I physically move my body and/or the camera further/closer whilst manually focussing the lens), and the lack of image stabilization is moot if you have enough light or are using a tripod (you turn IS off on a tripod anyways). If you’re doing macros, chances are you’ll have more than enough light, especially since you said you went and got a macro light ring.

/edit
I just did a test myself turning IS on and off on my 55-250 lens using my Raynox 150, and while it is possible to take good photos without IS on.. it is a royal pain in the ass (I was also only using on-camera flash and my cellphone flashlight propped up on an ice tea cannister as extra light). However, if you use a tripod, you can still go without the IS.

/edit 2
Also, with Sigma, what you’ll want to look for is “OS” as opposed to “IS”. On Sigma lenses it’s called Optical Stabilization.

 Signature 

Wearing duck crap doesn’t make you a duck - Floki
@Deviantart | @ShareCG
Tutorial: V4 Transmap Brows on Genesis (DS)
Free Script: Bulk convert V4/M4 mats for Genesis2 (DS/Poser)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2012 10:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  168
Joined  2010-09-21
Vaskania - 30 May 2012 10:03 PM
Tako Yakida - 30 May 2012 04:50 PM

Thanks. I checked out various sigma and tamron macro/telephotos but I am just not liking the macro results. For example, from the link you gave me: http://www.flickr.com/photos/51152370@N06/7303785490/in/pool-90618367@N00/ the image just looks kind of blocky to me. Most people might not notice but I am very picky. The Sigma also doesn’t seem to have autofocus or image stabilization. (My Nikon body does not have either function built-in so relies on the lens for them.) What I really need is pro-level lenses, lol.

You cannot rely on all photos for an accurate lens review. Some people just don’t know what the hell they’re doing. If there ARE good photos with a lens, then you know it’s possible and can pretty much dismiss the poor quality photos. With autofocus, I don’t use it for macros anyways (I physically move my body and/or the camera further/closer whilst manually focussing the lens), and the lack of image stabilization is moot if you have enough light or are using a tripod (you turn IS off on a tripod anyways). If you’re doing macros, chances are you’ll have more than enough light, especially since you said you went and got a macro light ring.

/edit
I just did a test myself turning IS on and off on my 55-250 lens using my Raynox 150, and while it is possible to take good photos without IS on.. it is a royal pain in the ass (I was also only using on-camera flash and my cellphone flashlight propped up on an ice tea cannister as extra light). However, if you use a tripod, you can still go without the IS.


I suppose I just suck at taking macros. The ring light I bought didn’t help much. It only works as a weak fill light. For 30 bucks I can’t complain too much about it, which is why I want to try more expensive equipment. Sorry I am such a pain, I’m just frustrated.


The worst part of this all is I don’t have any confidence that I’d be able to make money with this even if I produced the level of quality I want consistently. The world is full of photographers, but only a handful of Published Artists….

 Signature 

My DAZ Store
My Freebies

New Reality Tutorial - Ultra-realistic displacement in Reality

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2012 10:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4999
Joined  2005-08-03

I watched just about all of these guys’ videos and they helped a lot.
http://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoExtremist/videos
and
http://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoGavin/videos

Start with the 3 DSLR Basics videos from PhotoExtremist: http://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoExtremist/videos?query=basics
His What’s In My Camera Bag videos aren’t necessary, but they do show some equipment and why he uses some over others in certain situations.

Photography forums: http://www.dgrin.com/
Specifically this thread: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=143373

/edit
You may also want to look into what’s called photo stacking. You take multiple shots of the same thing focused on multiple areas and merge them together. It’s a work-around when you can’t get the right DOF you need.

 Signature 

Wearing duck crap doesn’t make you a duck - Floki
@Deviantart | @ShareCG
Tutorial: V4 Transmap Brows on Genesis (DS)
Free Script: Bulk convert V4/M4 mats for Genesis2 (DS/Poser)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2012 03:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Active Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  495
Joined  2004-06-12
Tako Yakida - 30 May 2012 04:50 PM

In any case, the 85mm for nikon I am looking at’s focus distance is 0.9 feet or 10.8 inches. Both the 40mm and 85mm nikon lenses offer true 1:1 magnification but the 40mm’s zoom range to get that magnification is like 1.3 inches. With the 1.5x crop factor 40mm = 60mm on a 35mm camera. On an Olympus, 40mm = 80mm with the 2.0 crop factor but the 85mm nikon = 127.5mm. It’s not too hard to figure out so I’m not worried about that so much as I am narrowness of DOF.


I’m totally ignorant about macro because it’s something I’ve never needed to get into.  To be honest, I actually thought one of the beauties of macro was to have that really narrow DOF, but it sounds as if I’m a bit off on that one.  Anyway, I hope you find the right lens, and yup, you can almost be certain that the only way to get the lens you want, is to buy a professional one.


Unless you’re rolling in cash, join the club, because every DSLR owner who makes use of the camera for a certain type of photography is going to be hit by the need to do some serious saving-up for the right lens.  If it’s of any consolation to you, you already have a head start in getting the lens you need - because you’re prepared to buy second-hand.  I’m not, so my stubbornness will cost me time and money.  Then again, it’s worth it to me because I never intend to sell the stuff I’m buying, so paying over the odds for new gear is something I prefer.


Just forget about steak and chips for a while, and get used to Pot Noodle!

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 5
3