PF Photography: Tips, Tricks, & Photo Sharing

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
Sign up Log in
1,418 replies · 242K views
larkspur said:
Have fun Moonbear. Can't wait to see some of your shots. You live in a beautiful area an can get some awesome landscapes.

But it's not my camera to take with me. :frown: I WISH! I only get to play with it at work. But, I spent the whole weekend in the lab taking pictures, and half of today too. It's amazing seeing the difference between photos with the fancy camera and my little point-and-shoot camera. I'm not a bad photographer afterall, I just can't afford several thousand dollars worth of camera equipment. :biggrin: :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Moonbear said:
But it's not my camera to take with me. :frown: I WISH! I only get to play with it at work. But, I spent the whole weekend in the lab taking pictures, and half of today too. It's amazing seeing the difference between photos with the fancy camera and my little point-and-shoot camera. I'm not a bad photographer afterall, I just can't afford several thousand dollars worth of camera equipment. :biggrin: :smile:
Andre got some amazing shots with a compact Panasonic (Leica lenses are a big plus), but his migration to Canon DSLR gear has opened some doors. The detail in the tight crops of his spiderweb shot is incredible.
 
wazon.jpg
 
To be honest - completely random. I see all elements every day, it just happened that I had to move them a little today - and the effect was unexpectedly interesting.
 
turbo-1 said:
Moonbear said:
But it's not my camera to take with me. :frown: I WISH! I only get to play with it at work. But, I spent the whole weekend in the lab taking pictures, and half of today too. It's amazing seeing the difference between photos with the fancy camera and my little point-and-shoot camera. I'm not a bad photographer afterall, I just can't afford several thousand dollars worth of camera equipment. :biggrin: :smile:
Andre got some amazing shots with a compact Panasonic (Leica lenses are a big plus), but his migration to Canon DSLR gear has opened some doors. The detail in the tight crops of his spiderweb shot is incredible.

A great picture shooter is the Panasonic FZ-8, with 12x zoom, retails on Ebay for about $150 buy-it-now.

The price is so low because it is outperformed (on paper) by it's big brother the
Panasonic FZ18, with 18x zoom, which retails on E-bay at about $260 but hard to find there, somewhere on page 8-9.

However the image quality of the FZ-8 is slightly better than the FZ18 due to the latter pressing the limits slightly on optics and pixel size. It's successor the FZ-28 is spoken about in superlatives and changes owners on Ebay at around $300.

A nice pocket size whopping 10x zoom camera is the Panasonic TZ5 (Ebay $260)

As mentioned by Turbo, the Panasonic predomininance is explained by the Leica lens.
 
Last edited:
Evo said:
Very nice Borek!
I have to agree, and I have to admit that I have a poor eye for possibilities like that. There are some photographers on PF that do a wonderful job in that regard - not my strong suit. I take pictures of stuff that I like, and try to crop them such that there is a little "balance" in their presentation - that's about the extent of my "artistry". It's funny that my artistic abilities don't carry over well to photography - in college, I spent a lot of time producing ink-and-pen drawings and watercolors of flowers, animals, etc.
 
This picture was made with the Panasonic FZ-18, full frame, reduced to 20% x 20% See the 100% crop

2kn4a1.jpg


and the same flowers with the Canon 450D with 18-55mm kit lens reduced to 18% x 18%

2yl8pzr.jpg


Spot the spider in the 100% crop
 
Last edited:
Borek said:
wazon.jpg
What is it Borek and how did you do it? It does look like art.:approve:
 
Ah well... once you know details, magic disappears :wink:

wazon2.jpg


Exit to the backyard/garden. Vase with a dried rose is there all the time, just stands about half a meter to the left. Single halogen light on most of the time. Blinds (shades? not sure how to call them in English) are semipermeable, so the shadow is visible on the outside - and I took the picture standing behind the door. Add some position/light adjusting for the best effect.
 
Borek said:
Ah well... once you know details, magic disappears :wink:

wazon2.jpg


Exit to the backyard/garden. Vase with a dried rose is there all the time, just stands about half a meter to the left. Single halogen light on most of the time. Blinds (shades? not sure how to call them in English) are semipermeable, so the shadow is visible on the outside - and I took the picture standing behind the door. Add some position/light adjusting for the best effect.

Very nice, Borek...it still has magic, even after learning its history.

But I keep waiting for someone to walk through the door...CRASH!
 
Andre said:
and the same flowers with the Canon 450D with 18-55mm kit lens reduced to 18% x 18%
That kit lens is pretty amazing. I was put off by the lightness of mine when I unpacked it, and figured that I would be replacing it with a "proper" short lens soon. Wrong. The plastic body holds a really wonderful suite of glass.
 
Borek said:
Ah well... once you know details, magic disappears :wink:

wazon2.jpg


Exit to the backyard/garden. Vase with a dried rose is there all the time, just stands about half a meter to the left. Single halogen light on most of the time. Blinds (shades? not sure how to call them in English) are semipermeable, so the shadow is visible on the outside - and I took the picture standing behind the door. Add some position/light adjusting for the best effect.

Thanks Borek.
 
lisab said:
But I keep waiting for someone to walk through the door...CRASH!

Won't happen, I have put the vase in this place only to take the picture :smile:
 
Andre said:
But it's fun, isn't it?

Anyway for those who seriously want to try photography on tight budgets (<150$) DP-Review has just published a comparison review.

Not surprized about the overall winner

I have to say that it's treated me well since I got it three years ago...taken many, many, many photo's with it. That review is an interesting read though.

Still can't wait to finish my studies, get a decent job and buy myself that elusive DSLR! :wink:
 
phyzmatix said:
Still can't wait to finish my studies, get a decent job and buy myself that elusive DSLR! :wink:

Better be really sure if you need one. For instance check these two macro pictures with 100% crops of the head:

Taken with the 150$ Panasonic FZ-8 (but excluding the additional required close up lens #1.5 of some 20-30$):

33a712p.jpg


taken with the $600 Canon 450D (XTi) with the kit lens:

2myqnhd.jpg


Having discovered that neither the Canon kit lens nor the telezoom are particulary good at this kind of work, I'm intending to do some more extravagant spending and getting a dedicated macro lens. On the short list are the Canon EF 100mm USM Macro and the Tamron 90mm Macro. Suggestions anybody?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Hi, Andre. I just hopped out to the kitchen table and snapped a picture of the root-end of a bulb of garlic with a penny for scale. The lens is the 28-135 USM IS. It's not a great macro lens, but it covers a fair range of focal lengths, and close-focuses to 18" or so. It's a nice walk-around lens. Poor incandescent lighting on a dark snowy day = shallow D.O.F.
macro.jpg

macrocrop.jpg


And here is a tight crop using less than 20% of the frame. Same lens.
damnBeetles.jpg
 
Last edited:
turbo-1 said:
Hi, Andre. I just hopped out to the kitchen table and snapped a picture of the root-end of a bulb of garlic with a penny for scale. The lens is the 28-135 USM IS. It's not a great macro lens, but it covers a fair range of focal lengths, and close-focuses to 18" or so. It's a nice walk-around lens. Poor incandescent lighting on a dark snowy day = shallow D.O.F.

Nice work Turbo, I'll have a closer look at that glass. Actually I was contemplating the primes since it's the sharpest you can get, especially in the 100mm range. the Tokina 100mm wins here on crispness but dropped out of the shortlist due to poor focussing. Actually the Tamron is still sharper (a wee tiny bit) than the Canon but the latter has a quick silent focus with no moving parts on the outside, scaring off butterflies, while the Tamron is a scaring beast, popping out the big cilinder suddenly with a lot of noise. Yet is the Canon worth an additional 130 euro?
 
Andre said:
Nice work Turbo, I'll have a closer look at that glass. Actually I was contemplating the primes since it's the sharpest you can get, especially in the 100mm range.
I was considering a prime, too with the intent of getting a fast macro, and then this lens came up with a 30D body as a new-but-out-of-box combo from a store at a really good price so I snagged it. It's great for sunny days, and 18" focus at 135mm (plus the crop factor of the smaller chip) magnifies things pretty well.

When I was shooting film, I would drag around several OM-1s and an OM-4, all loaded with fast primes. That's a lot of gear to take care of. The quality of the Canon zooms let's me pare down to two lenses on two bodies to cover 28-400mm (plus the kit lens if I want to go down to 18mm)
 
turbo-1 said:
I was considering a prime, too with the intent of getting a fast macro, and then this lens came up with a 30D body as a new-but-out-of-box combo from a store at a really good price so I snagged it. It's great for sunny days, and 18" focus at 135mm (plus the crop factor of the smaller chip) magnifies things pretty well.

When I was shooting film, I would drag around several OM-1s and an OM-4, all loaded with fast primes. That's a lot of gear to take care of. The quality of the Canon zooms let's me pare down to two lenses on two bodies to cover 28-400mm (plus the kit lens if I want to go down to 18mm)

Granted but if you want to see the facets/ compounds of the butterflies eyes then the zoom may be disappointing. I did a direct comparison here.

Hover over the arrow on top of the crop to toggle between the two and see why I still think about the prime, although it's more expensive and sadly without IS.
 
Last edited:
You're right, of course. One cannot expect the sharpness and lack of CA of a nice prime from an inexpensive zoom. If you're going to do a lot of macro photography, the choice is a clear one. Of course, if I could buy all the lenses that I wanted, I'd have to hire a porter to follow me around carrying cases and gear-bags.
 
Right, so there is the big bag and the small bag carrying only camera with one other lens, and crossing fingers for having selected the right ones.

Also the (slight) advantage of the prime is the 2.8 opening for better focussing and better bokeh for portraits.
 
Andre said:
Also the (slight) advantage of the prime is the 2.8 opening for better focussing and better bokeh for portraits.
That speed can help offset the lack of IS too, if you have enough light to stay with fast shutter speeds.

I've been down this road before and was tempted by the 100mm macro, but when the 28-135 and 30D combo came up new for less than $1000 (including shipping), I had to buy it. It's nice to have the 28-135 on one 30D and the 100-400 on the other. Fewer lens changes = fewer opportunities for dust, pollen, etc to get into the bodies.
 
What is a prime lens. I have an DSLR, but I am unsure what one is...?

TFM
 
TFM said:
What is a prime lens. I have an DSLR, but I am unsure what one is...?

TFM

A prime lens is fixed focus. No zoom. The drawback is obvious but the advantage is that prime lenses are always crisper. For a lot more of terminology go here:

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/
 
Ah, Thanks for the information/link :smile:

TFM
 
turbo-1 said:
That speed can help offset the lack of IS too, if you have enough light to stay with fast shutter speeds.

I've been down this road before and was tempted by the 100mm macro, but when the 28-135 and 30D combo came up new for less than $1000 (including shipping), I had to buy it. It's nice to have the 28-135 on one 30D and the 100-400 on the other. Fewer lens changes = fewer opportunities for dust, pollen, etc to get into the bodies.

Absolutely, ideally you want a single lens and the Panasonic FZ-x8 series is an excellent solution (although the focussing is too slow for action).

But the larger aperture is not helping the exposure in macro situation, you simply have to work between F8 - F16 and have a little more than a paper sheet thick depth of field. So it's always a trade off, flash, sun, tripod, high ISO.
 
Last edited:
Yep! Trade-offs all around. The IS let's me get away with some shots that really shouldn't be hand-held otherwise.

I have an old Bogen tripod, but no head. I put the head on my old Gitzo Pro Studex 412, and later sold it. So all my shots are hand-held, which is OK. Really good, solid tripods are heavy, and that's just one more thing to lug around. I should probably break down and buy a head to get long-exposure shots of streams and waterfalls (which we have in abundance here), surf, etc.
 

Similar threads

Are There Any Flickr Members Willing to Give Photography Tips to a Newbie?

  • fluidistic
  • · Replies 22 ·
  • General Discussion
Replies
22