Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

Raikiri posted:



Excuse the phone pics, only other camera I've got.

Anyone know of any good flash brackets like that? My lens with hood is ~8 inches long.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

I'm a newbie when it comes to macro but I finally got to play around with my new Canon 500D close up fliter that I'm pairing with my 70-200 IS II. I know some goons were curious about the combo and while I'm no expert, I'm pretty happy with it.







So far the only disadvantage I can see with using the setup is that when the filter is screwed in, you can only shoot macro. It doesn't work as a telephoto at all. Not too big of a deal if you ask me.

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

What is it?

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

A5H posted:

Guys what's the best way for me to shoot macro on the cheap.
The lenses I currently have are the nifty 50, 8-16 sigma, 17-50 tamron and 70-200 F4L. I have some crappy cheap extension tubes but no AF.
I was thinking of grabbing the Raynox DCR-250 thing and using it with my 70-200L? Is it worth like £35? Will the images be pretty good?

I never used the Raynox thing but I use the Canon 500D on my 70-200 2.8 IS II and it's excellent. I actually had a 150mm dedicated macro lens for a good while and with this new setup, I really don't miss it. I don't notice any difference in the image quality and the only disadvantage I can see is that I lose infinity focus, which IMO isn't a big deal. Also you won't be at a disadvantage shooting macro at f/4 and smaller. I doubt you'll ever run into a macro situation where too much area is in focus.

I don't know what you'd pay for it in pounds, but here in the states the Raynox goes for $60 and the Canon for about $144. I couldn't tell you if it's worth the savings.

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

A5H posted:

I'm on a crop body so are you sure? (7D)
The filter on the F4L is 67mm so ideal? Also there's a lot of shots on flickr using that combo?
The canon is like 5 times more expensive and I'm not that interested, just want to fool around.

I forgot about that. The 2.8 I have is 77mm. It doesn't seem Canon makes lens adaptors that size so I would forget about buying Canon.

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

Stew Man Chew posted:

I've been having this problem a lot, would a nice monopod (ideally quick-adjusting) help me out if bugs are my primary subject? I'm just trying to figure out additional ways to add stability while I'm framing a shot. I figure tripods are too slow and cumbersome specially if I'm kinda following a bug around waiting for him to post up for a photo op.

At the very least, a tripod can be a used as a quick acting monopod, though bulkier. As far as slow and cumbersome, that all depends on how much you're willing to spend on a tripod. Carbon fiber is very light and finding a tripod with independently moving legs will speed things up a lot. I don't really feel I need a monopod at all.

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

At Epcot right now they're having the flower and garden fest which has a really cool butterfly garden. Best part is that it's under a big white translucent tent for nice soft light.


Epcot Flower and Garden Fest by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr


Epcot Flower and Garden Fest by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr


Epcot Flower and Garden Fest by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr


Cocoon at Epcot Flower and Garden Fest by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr


Cocoon at Epcot Flower and Garden Fest by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr


Epcot Flower and Garden Fest by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

BobTheCow posted:

Macro macro macro!

I have zero macro experience. I'm shooting a wedding at the end of the month. I want to make some macro images of at the very least rings and cake details, probably more as I think of them.

I have a 50/1.8 and 70-200/2.8 (Canon if it matters). I figure my best bet is to buy a reversal ring ASAP and practice with it. Should I get one for the 50, or the 70-200? Any practical differences with either image quality or ease of use?

Pick up this close up lens and it'll turn your 70-200 into a lens that's is very close to being just as good as a dedicate macro. The only real drawback to it is that you lose infinity focus. which isn't a big deal. I've had a dedicated macro and now I exclusively use the the close up lens on my 70-200 2.8 IS II. I don't miss the old lens at all.

Reversal rings are cheap but they're a pain in the rear end if you ask me. You have pop the lens off then put it back on if you want to change the aperture and the only way to focus the shot is to move the camera back and forth.

Haggins fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Apr 12, 2011

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

BobTheCow posted:

e: Grr, the 500D seems to be out of stock absolutely everywhere.

I had the same problem when I went to buy mine. It just doesn't seem to stay in stock long. I ended up buying mine from an ebay seller in Hong Kong.

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

You could always get one of those ring adaptors from ray flash or orbis if you like the ring flash look.

Speaking of lighting, what do you guys do for lighting setups? I have a couple speedlites and I'm still trying to figure out a good way to light for macro.

Haggins fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Jul 22, 2011

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

I might do some macro this week. Anywhere in particular you guys like to go for bug shots? I don't know if I should seek out a flower garden or just find a spot in the woods.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Haggins
Jul 1, 2004

Here is an ugly little fucker I saw when I was walking around shooting this morning:


banana spider by Ryan-Tamm, on Flickr

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply