|
Wild EEPROM posted:Might just be yours. I have 2 F3's and the ISO ring is easy to use on both. Ugh. Debating if I should return it or try to fix it. I was able to get it to turn one direction a few times, but now it's stuck at 6400.
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:Yeah a Capture Clip Pro Don't know how I missed this when clicking around the PD website before, but I think this is exactly what I need.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Don't know how I missed this when clicking around the PD website before, but I think this is exactly what I need. If you do not intend to use another strap, buy the clutch hand strap to securely hold your camera if it'll fit (DSLR, etc). I almost dropped my 5D3 trying to put it into the clip a few times, getting it out is easier.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Ugh. Debating if I should return it or try to fix it. I was able to get it to turn one direction a few times, but now it's stuck at 6400.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 10:12
|
|
|
Yeah, I just exchanged it with a slightly more beat up F3HP, and the ISO selector was easy to use. Shame it was broken because it was almost in perfect condition.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
I'd like to get into insect photography (or macro in general, but mainly insects), I have about 500$ to blow and I own a 60D. I've done a bit of macro using a reverse ring, I love it and now I'm willing to step up my game. So assuming I have absolutely jack poo poo besides the body for macro photography and that I don't mind buying used/refurbished, how well can I do with 500$? I'm interested in getting a tripod and lighting also if necessary (if I can even go that far with 500$) or any other accessory I might need that I'm not aware of. Am I too poor for this?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
You could afford a used canon 100mm f/2.8 macro. But you'll have to search carefully and get a little lucky. The problem is that leaves you with not much else, and support & lighting would be very helpful. Do you have a laptop that you can tether the camera to for live view and computer-based focus control? Being able to tap a button to step focus and make exposures helps immensely with focus stacking. There are cheaper tele macros than the ef100, but I don't know which ones are good. A small net, lunch pail, and some of those water-filled plastic ice packs are very useful for insect photography as well. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Jun 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Highblood posted:I'd like to get into insect photography (or macro in general, but mainly insects), I have about 500$ to blow and I own a 60D. I've done a bit of macro using a reverse ring, I love it and now I'm willing to step up my game. So assuming I have absolutely jack poo poo besides the body for macro photography and that I don't mind buying used/refurbished, how well can I do with 500$? I'm interested in getting a tripod and lighting also if necessary (if I can even go that far with 500$) or any other accessory I might need that I'm not aware of. I'd spend money on some lighting poo poo (big flash box, ringlight, something where you can illuminate poo poo well) before getting a big macro lens. Tripod helps but isn't as necessary imo if you've got a nice flash (and depending on what you're shooting stuff might be moving too much anyways). When I do it I walk around with the camera in one hand, and a cheap yongnuo 560 hotshoe flash with a 6x8 softlight thing on it to even things out, and either a cable or a wireless trigger to let me trigger it from wherever. That sorta gear and a tamron 90mm (you don't really need autofocus or stuff when you're shooting macro imo... just move the camera. Unless you want to do cheaper focus stacking of course!) can probably be done for under $500 easily, and will be better than a canon 100 with no lighting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Depends what you're trying to do. Insects in the wild is different from insects in a (portable) studio - what SMERSH mouth is talking about with the ice-water and so forth. I took this today (well, it's 5 minutes past midnight where I am, so technically yesterday) using a setup similar to what Mr. Despair describes. I used my 105mm macro lens, a manual-focus Vivitar Series 1 in K-mount on my Pentax K-5, with lighting supplied by my Sigma EF-530 flash in wireless-slave mode, held in my left hand, braced against the lens. Mosquito Drinking Nectar by Martin Brummell, on FlickrOne of the great things about wireless flash is you can get really silly with it - I took this with the flash pointing up from underneath the plant, after I put half a bottle of wine in me and went down to the beach I was camping near.  SD 114 Bruny Part 4 Macro on the beach 8 by Martin Brummell, on FlickrGet a good-enough flash that will communicate with your camera while it's not mounted on the camera body - either wirelessly, or through a cable. Get a reasonably-good macro lens. My Viv S1 105mm is probably not available in a mount your Canon can use, but the Tamron 90mm (as suggested by Mr. Despair) has a very good reputation and I think it would get you started on this. Certainly this combo of gear can be had for under $500 (wine not included).
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
Highblood posted:I'd like to get into insect photography (or macro in general, but mainly insects), I have about 500$ to blow and I own a 60D. I've done a bit of macro using a reverse ring, I love it and now I'm willing to step up my game. So assuming I have absolutely jack poo poo besides the body for macro photography and that I don't mind buying used/refurbished, how well can I do with 500$? I'm interested in getting a tripod and lighting also if necessary (if I can even go that far with 500$) or any other accessory I might need that I'm not aware of. About half of the insect photographers I know use a KX-800 twin flash. $280, plus some for a pile of rechargable AA batteries and a paper towel diffuser, and that's pretty much all you need for a good lighting setup (unless you do lightbox stuff). If you're getting good results with your reversal ring, the lighting probably makes the most difference. Just keep an eye on on ebay or KEH for a beaten up old 100mm macro, you can probably find one for less than $300. Bubbacub fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Jun 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
This is I bet you could do this for under $500: 100mm macro, kenko extension tubes, flash (what's a used 430ex go for?), adjustable flash bracket, cheap monopod. Make a home-made flash diffuser out of translucent drawer liner and some velcro.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
That KX-800 is sexy as hell but that price is hella steep. I may have forgotten to mention that I'm canadian, which actually makes all of this a lot more expensive, but I'm willing to go the extra length and spend 640$ CAD give or take. So far I've decided on the kenko extension tubes, a tamron 90mm and I would have loved to snag that KX-800 but that spikes up the cost to about 840$ in total. There's a 430ex on keh for about 100$, the grade is "Bargain" but since it's just a flash, that shouldn't matter at all right? Any specific recommendations for the flash bracket? I searched a bit and I was kind of overwhelmed by all the different types of brackets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
I think I have this one: It's got 2 adjustable arms if you want you can make a mini-reflector for the arm opposite the flash. You can also simplify and take off the 2nd arm and go with just the flash. One thing to note is that the flash is really too heavy for the arm if you are aiming down you really have to tighten the arms super well or they will swing. For this reason I wouldn't whole-heartedly recommend this one for outdoor macro work when you're moving around a lot- it works but can occasionally be a little frustrating. fyi the flash diffuser plans are here No idea about the flash and bgn quality. Assuming the contacts work and you can adjust the +/- ev and it doesn't start a fire the first time you use it, it should be fine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Highblood posted:That KX-800 is sexy as hell but that price is hella steep. If you want to shoot bugs, check out Thomas Shahan's stuff: https://www.youtube.com/user/terser/featured
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Yes Thomas is amazing I love his stuff. Thank you everyone for the help. I've bought everything now. For the bracket I decided to go with a vintage sunpak pistol grip, it was dirt cheap so if it's poo poo I can just throw it away. Apparently these fuckers are rock solid and don't budge unless you want it to, so we'll see I guess. I'm super stoked to get started with this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Highblood posted:That KX-800 is sexy as hell but that price is hella steep. I shoot a lot of macro. It's my main hobby. I've used gear from lovely lenses and reversing rings, through L lenses, focus stacking with automated stepper motors, etc. I've done a lot, and I love it. If you can give me examples of the kinds of photos you want to take I can guide you to the gear you need. I completely agree with bubbacup that you need a flash first. If you have a reversing ring and a lens to stick in front then you have all you need for optics. You need light. More expensive lenses do not enable you to take better pictures, they make it easier to take the same pictures. You can't take any of them without a flash and good diffuser. This is a fact. I've done dedicated bug photography workshops in the rain forest, and everyone has some elaborate custom made diffuser rig. I have multiple 430exs, a canon mt-24ex, and the kx-800. I use the kx-800 most of the time unless I'm handholding a softbox. You can make a great diffuser with a rubber band and a cut up yogurt bottle. Like, world class photographers use a setup like that. That's all you need. But you need a flash to shoot through it. I shot this a couple weeks ago  Jumping spiderUsing this  Macro field setup June 2016 You don't need the MP-E lens if you have anything that does 2:1 magnification. A 50mm on a reversing ring is fine if you can deal with a dark viewfinder. Seriously, a reversed lens on a bellows with a diffused single flash is all you need for world class photos. Look at this guy's setup: https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallmen/21816371891 Now look at his work: https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallmen/24533656206/in/dateposted/ I've bought this guys' book, and he's a god drat monster. edit: oh, and if you do get a macro lens, remember that if you are shooting stuff like I do (and like Thomas Shahan, etc) then you are not using autofocus. You set the magnification you want, then move the camera in and out to focus. So, that means you don't need a modern lens with autofocus at all. Aperture control is very useful because you need to shoot stopped down, and a fully manual lens will be really dark if it doesn't have aperture control. But get any old macro lens and stick a raynox DCR-150 in front and you seriously have everything you need for optics up to 2:1. Graniteman fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Jun 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:edit: oh, and if you do get a macro lens, remember that if you are shooting stuff like I do (and like Thomas Shahan, etc) then you are not using autofocus. You set the magnification you want, then move the camera in and out to focus. So, that means you don't need a modern lens with autofocus at all. Aperture control is very useful because you need to shoot stopped down, and a fully manual lens will be really dark if it doesn't have aperture control. But get any old macro lens and stick a raynox DCR-150 in front and you seriously have everything you need for optics up to 2:1. What do you think about the Raynox versus the fancy Canon 500D closeup filter? Is the Canon any better?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:What do you think about the Raynox versus the fancy Canon 500D closeup filter? Is the Canon any better? They are supposed to be pretty good from what I've seen but are not commonly used by the higher-magnification macro community. In fact I don't know of anyone that I follow who uses one. Know that they are only +2 diopter for the Canon 500D, or +4 for the 250D. Compare to the Raynox DCR-250 at +8, or DCR-150 at +4.8. They are not really solving the same problem optically. A really good resource for technical elements of macro is the photomacrography.net forums. Here is a post listing close up filters that the community has used with some success. These forums have a ton of really detailed information. They're run by Rik Littlefield, the guy who wrote the best focus stacking software, Zerene Stacker. You may not get great advice on composition or field technique, but if you want a deep dive in how to get pixel sharp images, especially focus stacking, it's the best place to look. The raynox is definitely good enough for whatever you are planning to shoot, and it's cheap. Look at the work of Nicky Bay. He shoots everything through a DCR-250. His equipment page shows his setup in detail. I shot with him at a workshop last year and like a lot of elements of his field rig, and my current setup is inspired by his. I'll say that the raynox is a little sensitive to how close you mount it to your main lens. You want it pretty close, and Nicky strongly recommends that you get some step-down rings to thread it to your main lens so it will be perfectly centered. The included adapter "pinches" outward to hold it in place, but it can wiggle. When I do a/b testing with the MP-E 65mm at 2:1 versus a 100mm f/2.8 macro + raynox at 2:1, I find the mp-e is sharper at 100% crop, but the macro+raynox combo is still good enough, and more versatile. My standard gear is to shoot the mp-e in cooler areas where the bugs are 35mm or smaller, but use the 100mm+raynox in tropical areas where I'm shooting bigger bugs + salamaders etc. This shot was with a 100mm macro + raynox (cropped some). I'm perfectly happy with that. Basically, the light diffuser make a way bigger difference than the optics. Macro lenses are all sharp enough.  [url=https://flic.kr/p/xJUwgY]
Graniteman fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Jun 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
Has anyone here had much luck with the Venus KX-800? I got one the other day but it was labelled "KR-800", and one of the arms broke on me without much force at all. What the hell? I'm not sure whether to ask for a replacement or refund at this point, it was from https://www.laowalens.co.uk/ as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Jimlad posted:Has anyone here had much luck with the Venus KX-800? I got one the other day but it was labelled "KR-800", and one of the arms broke on me without much force at all. What the hell? I'm not sure whether to ask for a replacement or refund at this point, it was from https://www.laowalens.co.uk/ as well. I have one. It says "KuangRen KX-800" on the back. I've used it for about a year with no problems. I was at a workshop in the jungle last year and a guy had one which died on day 1, presumably from the humidity. It failed so that it would only fire at full power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:If you can give me examples of the kinds of photos you want to take I can guide you to the gear you need. I'm posting this a bit late since I've already bought a bunch of stuff, but I figured you might have additonal tips and recommendations (or tell me that what I've bought is retarded, also possible), you asked for examples of what kind of photos I'd like to take and I'm mainly interested in high magnification photos of insects just like those that John Hallmén takes. I haven't received my gear yet but I bought a tamron 90mm, kenko extension tubes, a 430ex and a vintage flash bracket that seemed pretty solid and recommended after doing a bit of research. I also have a reverse ring and a 50mm to slap on it. Highblood fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Jun 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Highblood posted:I'm posting this a bit late since I've already bought a bunch of stuff, but I figured you might have additonal tips and recommendations (or tell me that what I've bought is retarded, also possible), you asked for examples of what kind of photos I'd like to take and I'm mainly interested in high magnification photos of insects just like those that John Hallmén takes. I haven't received my gear yet but I bought a tamron 90mm, kenko extension tubes, a 430ex and a vintage flash bracket that seemed pretty solid and recommended after doing a bit of research. I also have a reverse ring and a 50mm to slap on it. Well, to set expectations, John is famous for focus stacking insects in natural light in the field. That's most of his flickr stream, and what's in his book. 1. it's hard as gently caress 2. the bugs need to be cold so they don't move at all as he takes his 40 pictures. He lives in Sweden and shoots there where it's cold a lot. 3. he uses focusing rails and tripods to line up and shoot his photo series, which he combines mostly manually using very developed photoshop skills. He also uses Zerene Stacker. edit: 4. No wind to move the subject around. 5. You still need plamps and poo poo to hold everything in place. I think John is the best there is. But recognize that shooting natural light stacks in the field is some next level poo poo. By all means, go for it! But you will need at least a focusing rail, cold bugs, and a poo poo load of practice. Very few people do it, probably because it's the hardest (and most impressive) way to shoot, but you do get the best results if you can pull it off. If you want to shoot single images in the field that's a much easier place to start. Get to work building light modifiers for your flash. You'll build a lot. If there's one thing I see among all serious bug photographers it's that nobody is ever satisfied with their diffuser, and it always improving it. It's always too big, too bulky, or wrong highlights, or wrong shape, or not portable, or not good for high magnification, or not good for low magnification, or usually a combination of several of those. You've got a good kit to work with, you just need the diffuser. I'm pretty happy with mine because I've got something portable and easy to swap in and out different sizes and shapes. Here's a bunch of example diffusers, mixed in with studio stacking gear. Graniteman fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Jun 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
Jimlad posted:Has anyone here had much luck with the Venus KX-800? I got one the other day but it was labelled "KR-800", and one of the arms broke on me without much force at all. What the hell? I'm not sure whether to ask for a replacement or refund at this point, it was from https://www.laowalens.co.uk/ as well. I've used mine for over a year with no problems, but I saw someone's brand new unit have one of the arms break after like a day in the field. Worth contacting the company for a replacement if you can. Depending on where the break happened, you might be able to splint and glue the affected segments.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Bought two extra Wasabi batteries for my camera and it came with a charger. Would it be detrimental if I used my OEM Fuji battery with it or vice versa? I'd rather just pack one charger when travelling and the Wasabi is more compact.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
madjdmyo posted:Bought two extra Wasabi batteries for my camera and it came with a charger. Would it be detrimental if I used my OEM Fuji battery with it or vice versa? I'd rather just pack one charger when travelling and the Wasabi is more compact. Nope, I only use the wasabi charger and I have all sorts of batteries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
Yeah, you're fine. Wasabi chargers fire up my OEM olympus batteries with no issue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 11:59
|
|
|
So I got most of my stuff and the tamron 90mm works great but when I add extension tubes I get a lot of visible specs in my pictures, tried carefully cleaning it with glass cloth and nothing moves. Is this lens hosed for high magnification or am I just dumb? e: it's actually visible no matter what, now I'm just really sad Highblood fucked around with this message at 01:51 on Jun 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Sounds like sensor dust. Blow the dust off, see if it gets better. If not, you might need to swab it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
If it's sensor dust, any reason why I only see it on the tamron 90mm?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
What does the rear element of the lens look like? Are you only shooting at super small apertures? Or is it at any aperture?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
Wow okay I am dumb as gently caress, it is my sensor. I didn't know higher apertures made sensor dust more visible. It does indeed appear on all my lenses at a high aperture. That's a relief, kinda. I am terrified of getting near that thing and was foolishly hoping to never have to. Thanks and sorry for panicking a bit for no reason.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
Highblood posted:Wow okay I am dumb as gently caress, it is my sensor. I didn't know higher apertures made sensor dust more visible. It does indeed appear on all my lenses at a high aperture. Rocket blower, and don't sweat it too much.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
Is it really that noticeable in a real photo? My sensor dust only bothers me when I'm doing a focus stack.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
Yeah I think so, here's a shot I messed up where I think it's really visible, you can see this in all of them but this one had the perfect background color to really make it pop out
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
I just realised my 18-55mm canon autofocus is broken from a drop my camera had a few years back, and need to replace it before a trip. I currently have a Sigma 10-20, a Canon 50mm 1.8, and a Sigma 50-200 that I'd also like to replace because it kind of sucks and I don't use it as much despite liking telephotos. My budget is quite tight, as I've got a bunch of spending to do for other bullshit in run up to the trip but I would like something better than what the 18-55 provided. If I can wiggle in a better telephoto too (even on financing) then that'd be great. For record I used my telephoto almost always handheld and for nature stuff, and very rarely on a tripod. Camera is a 60D.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
I believe that "a better 18-55" is still the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 is a solid wide lens for crop sensor cameras. It's about $400 new.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Either is fine. VC buys you a couple stops at the price of a little sharpness.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Thanks for the quick replies! That low f stop sounds nice. Is it worth looking at any that push the focal length further or not? Like a 24-70 or something. e: Had a gander at the 17-50 Sigma, seems really nice especially at £280/$370 - love Sigma's pricing. Tempted by their 18-35 1.8 too to be honest, I found 50 a little tight a lot which made me use my 50mm 1.8 prime a lot less than I'd like. ijyt fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Jun 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
ijyt posted:Thanks for the quick replies! That low f stop sounds nice. 24mm is a little long on a crop. You'll want an 18 to get wide enough. The Sigma 18-35 1.8 is amazing and stayed on my camera all the time until I upgraded to full frame. It is expensive though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 19:34
|
|
