Hi,
is anybody using a D-SLR (esp. Canon 350d/Digital Rebel XT) here.
I'm currently looking for a (inexpensive) bright zoom (something about 20-100mm) lens.
I have an eye on Sigma 28-70 2.8 or Tamron 28-75 2.8.
Any experience about that lens or other recommendation?
Any experience about available light photography in tanks?
Br.,
Dirk
Affordable D-SLR lens?
Hi Mustafa,
once again my fault
I'm not looking for a lens with fixed focal length. What is the opposite called? Thought it is zoom.
Of course I'm looking for a macro...
I want to do something like this again:
I took this photo with a Sony DSC-F717 which I sold because of release delay - a big fault...
Br.,
Dirk
once again my fault
I'm not looking for a lens with fixed focal length. What is the opposite called? Thought it is zoom.
Of course I'm looking for a macro...
I want to do something like this again:
I took this photo with a Sony DSC-F717 which I sold because of release delay - a big fault...
Br.,
Dirk
I know i'm new on this forum, but i'm going to jump in and give some opinions, and hope i'm not stepping on anyone's toes. I was a professional wildlife photographer and cinematographer for several years and am a huge fan of Canon...their 'L' series lens are fantastic. However, when i need to save money, i go with Sigma. I LOVE their macro lenses, even in side-by-side comparison with Canon. My workhorse macro is the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 which has a tiny minimum focusing distance of about a foot, and is a 1:1 macro, all for a very decent price. The 180mm f/3.5 is even better--the internal floating focus is a definite improvement over the 105, especially if you're using a filter or macro ringlite attached to the front of the lens.
Tamron--you know the saying 'If you don't have anything nice to say...'? Enough said.
Also (again, not trying to be a newbie who corrects/criticises), most decent macro lenses have a fixed focal length, so you can't actually 'zoom' in or out, although of course you can move closer or farther and refocus; however, the 'f' number refers to the aperture opening--referred to as 'f-stop' or 'lens speed'--and will determine the minimum lighting you can shoot in with a certain film speed (ISO)...so the lower the f-number, the less light you need to take the photograph or the 'faster' the lens. Faster lenses are great but tend to cost more.
If you'd rather spend several hundred dollars on shrimp and crays than on a new lens, let me offer another suggestion--close-up lens filters. These are stackable filters that screw onto the front of your lens and come in magnifications of +1, +2, +3 and so on. Buy a set of +1 through +3, play around with taking photos with each filter individually and then combinations of them stacked on top of each other. Your depth of field will be extremely shallow but very little light is lost and you'll spend less than $75 for the whole thing.
My second recommendation is to use a tripod, but if you don't have one then get a beanbag and drape it over the back of a chair, then rest your lens on that and see camera-shake disappear.
Enough of my two cents. In the last week i've read the entire shrimp and cray forum pages (all 40+ pages of them) and this is the first time i thought it was worth adding.
Best regards,
Cara
Tamron--you know the saying 'If you don't have anything nice to say...'? Enough said.
Also (again, not trying to be a newbie who corrects/criticises), most decent macro lenses have a fixed focal length, so you can't actually 'zoom' in or out, although of course you can move closer or farther and refocus; however, the 'f' number refers to the aperture opening--referred to as 'f-stop' or 'lens speed'--and will determine the minimum lighting you can shoot in with a certain film speed (ISO)...so the lower the f-number, the less light you need to take the photograph or the 'faster' the lens. Faster lenses are great but tend to cost more.
If you'd rather spend several hundred dollars on shrimp and crays than on a new lens, let me offer another suggestion--close-up lens filters. These are stackable filters that screw onto the front of your lens and come in magnifications of +1, +2, +3 and so on. Buy a set of +1 through +3, play around with taking photos with each filter individually and then combinations of them stacked on top of each other. Your depth of field will be extremely shallow but very little light is lost and you'll spend less than $75 for the whole thing.
My second recommendation is to use a tripod, but if you don't have one then get a beanbag and drape it over the back of a chair, then rest your lens on that and see camera-shake disappear.
Enough of my two cents. In the last week i've read the entire shrimp and cray forum pages (all 40+ pages of them) and this is the first time i thought it was worth adding.
Best regards,
Cara
-
Rainbowfish
- Egg
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:02 pm
- Location: St. Louis, Missouri
G'day Paul. How is life and the catfish treating you these days! Tell me more about this type of mount. You know that I have this fantastic Kiron 105 mm macro (Minolta mount, 1:1 non-auto focus, F2.8 ) lens that I had to abandon when I switched over to Canon and now with the Rebel XTi (400d). The Canon macro (still a 2.8 ) isn't bad but it's just not as good as I got out of that Kiron. Since I never autofocus on my fish/shrimp pics anyway if there is a way to use that old lens I'd love to find out how.pturley wrote: With the Adapt-all mount, it'll move up to an F bayonett if I ever invest in Nikon (or Canon).
Sincerely,
Paul E. Turley
BTW it was suggested that when using closeup lenses you'll lose depth of field. DOF, in macro photography really is everything. If you want to get a great looking shrimp/fish pic you really need to have it on F-16 or F-22. If adding a closeup lens or a stack of them is going to drop you much below an F-16 (equavalent at 100 mm) then your results will not be very promising. If you want to really nail that tiny shrimp from whisker to tail get a macro lens, it's totally worth the money! I think that a 100/105 mm macro lens is a better choice than a 50 mm macro, especially for little things that are going to scurry away when you get too much in their face.
cheers,
Gary
-
jamesbell4
- Egg
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 11:31 pm
Re: Affordable D-SLR lens?
A couple of years back i played around with a non digital SLR.
I now have a little D-SLR (Panasonic G1) so I bought an adapter to mount my old lenses (M42 screw fit) on the new camera's Micro 4/3 body on ebay.
I can't use autofocus or set the aperture automatically from the camera while using the adapter but I find manually focusing when shooting macro more reliable anyway.
So the most affordable lens you can get is probably an old one if you use an appropriate adaptor.
While its not a specific 'macro' lens my old 50mm lens can focus on on things around as close as 1 foot away.
I don't have extension tubes of bellows to play with, but I do have a 2x and 3x teleconverter - which works better than cropping.
Giving the shrimp something to eat helps them keep still - while allows for longer exposures. I don't like using flash.
I also use a tripod.
Because my new G1 has doesn't have a full sized sensor so using a 50mm lens on the G1 achieves the same results as 100mm lens would on my old non digital camera.
Here are some uncropped thumbnails (click to see full image):
50mm lense on the G1
and a 50mm using the 2x teleconverter
Depending on your lens/camera body combo it might not be possible to focus to infinity (objects furthest away) - thought obviously for macro thats normally a problem.
I now have a little D-SLR (Panasonic G1) so I bought an adapter to mount my old lenses (M42 screw fit) on the new camera's Micro 4/3 body on ebay.
I can't use autofocus or set the aperture automatically from the camera while using the adapter but I find manually focusing when shooting macro more reliable anyway.
So the most affordable lens you can get is probably an old one if you use an appropriate adaptor.
While its not a specific 'macro' lens my old 50mm lens can focus on on things around as close as 1 foot away.
I don't have extension tubes of bellows to play with, but I do have a 2x and 3x teleconverter - which works better than cropping.
Giving the shrimp something to eat helps them keep still - while allows for longer exposures. I don't like using flash.
I also use a tripod.
Because my new G1 has doesn't have a full sized sensor so using a 50mm lens on the G1 achieves the same results as 100mm lens would on my old non digital camera.
Here are some uncropped thumbnails (click to see full image):
50mm lense on the G1
and a 50mm using the 2x teleconverter
Depending on your lens/camera body combo it might not be possible to focus to infinity (objects furthest away) - thought obviously for macro thats normally a problem.