Photography tips

[Draiman]

haha...well guys tomorrow im off. so im going to go shopping....theres a camera shop here in town im goin g to check out....the price range ifor me is about 4 grand...also...yea im upgrading!...i just feel the need to..kinda outgrown my old camera...its still nice and is in perfect working condition...also i am planing on getting a nikon....a macro lens...and a flash ring...like i said...this is a future investment, i do plan on trying to someday doing this as a living...and diddling around with t shots and other insects though there mainly my "hobby focus", i do see what you are saying buy just tryi ng to get new flashes to play around with, but while i got the money im just going all the way. also the photography classes im enrolling in this spring/summer hs finacial aid that will cover lens upgrades and tripods flashes just not the camera...sooo...if im lucky i may get me some government paid for flashes and lenses for school ! and i belive someone said im the one who has to be happy....but in the long run when i open a buisness its the clients im trying to please.....so even if i think its junk, and they like it then thats what i give them...supply and demand right?....another thing im curious about though....is...once i do start taking incredible shots....how do the pros devolope them?...since everything is digital now do they use a home printer , a photo machine, or what....?

For a dedicated macro lens I suggest you have a look at the Nikkor 105mm VR (however - with all due respect, I don't think you should get one at this stage). A very good beginner DSLR is the Nikon D40 - not only is it extremely user-friendly, it's also much lighter than other DSLRs and cheap. Arguably the most value-for-money entry-level DSLR on the market. Here is a very in-depth review of the D40:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD40/

As for myself, I own only a D40, the 18-55mm kit lens and a Hoya macro filter; and take a look at my Flickr - you'll be surprised. All my gear cost me no more than SGD $800. I have no fancy macro lens; not even an external speedlight.

 

[biomarine2000]

For a dedicated macro lens I suggest you have a look at the Nikkor 105mm VR (however - with all due respect, I don't think you should get one at this stage). A very good beginner DSLR is the Nikon D40 - not only is it extremely user-friendly, it's also much lighter than other DSLRs and cheap. Arguably the most value-for-money entry-level DSLR on the market. Here is a very in-depth review of the D40:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD40/

As for myself, I own only a D40, the 18-55mm kit lens and a Hoya macro filter; and take a look at my Flickr - you'll be surprised. All my gear cost me no more than SGD $800. I have no fancy macro lens; not even an external speedlight.

Gavin, what kind of external lighting are you using? Your pictures look great. I'm guessing you use manual setting with a tripod.

 

[Draiman]

Gavin, what kind of external lighting are you using? Your pictures look great. I'm guessing you use manual setting with a tripod.

Thanks. I have never used my tripod, which was a freebie. All my photos, except for the long exposures, are handheld (with the long exposure photos, I improvise with whatever I have, wherever I am). I don't use any special external lighting either, apart from sunlight and my inbuilt flash.

 

[codykrr]

gavin, your pictures are great but like i said before, im wanting to eventually open shop. and i honestly dont feel a d40 would cut it in certain situations....yeah i like taking macro pictures alot!..but i still want something to grow into....i dont want to be in the same boat im floating now....outgrown my camera and realized its capibilities are met. like i said im going to take some class this year and id like to just jump in head first get what i want and better myself from there....its always seems when im taking pictures i want more than what i get from my current camera and i dont like knowing they could be better but my gear is holding me back. again this is an investment for me in the long run, and yeah i have 4 grand to spend but the camera im looking at is only 1700 but i figure with gear and lighting equipment that gives me a good range to work with...i also understand that just because you buy a race car doesnt make you a race car driver, but with enough patience you can turn into one...another thing i have considered is trying to work for areal estate office taking pictures of houses to advertise, weddings, sports, maybe make some of my own calenders, also lots of money in ariel photography, so macro isnt a big focus just a plus...i will take everything everyone on here has said into mind when and before i buy....so again i thank you all for advice. i am just still browsing reviews and hearing personal reports as of right now...part of shopping i guess

 

[jharr]

OK, so I took some quick snaps of one of my B. smithi slings. Camera/lens/flash details in the thread. I love my D70s. It does almost everything I want it to do. I only wish it had a built-in intervalometer like the D200. But this thing is one tough camera! While in Uganda someone picked it up and dropped it from waist height onto a brick floor. I thought for sure it was done for, but there was absolutely no breakage. I don't know about the D40, 60, 80. I think they used more plastic in the construction of those. The D200 has more metal, but is way heavier. I don't know about you, but having my camera survive a drop like that while on a trip of a lifetime is worth 10x what I paid for it (< $1000).

Anyway take a look at the photos. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?p=1340927#post1340927

J--

 

[stooka]

im thinking of getting a point and shoot camera,been looking at the Canon powershot G10.does anybody have any experience with these for spider pics?

stu

 

[Talkenlate04]

Anyway take a look at the photos. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
J--

Why are you using a Nikkor 28-105 (1:3.5-4.5 D) lens on macro mode? :? Your smithi pictures are ok, but you won't get true macro pictures with that lens.

 

[Skullptor]

If you DSLR owners don't mind giving me your expertise on my current photography problem I'm having.

Camera-Nikon D40

Problem- glare from flash, too orange without flash, cannot capture low lighting accurately.

The three photos show a complete washout of the dim orange light on Auto.

Another setting on the wheel show my reflection and the flash light.

Only picture that comes close to showing very low light, is too orange with -still- a reflection.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Talkenlate04]

With most things that will reflect the flash you need to tilt the camera slightly up or down. When you do that the flash does not hit dead on and come back as a glare. It take some tinkering but that should fix your problem.

I am not sure what you are doing with the cardboard box in the other two pictures............:?

 

[Skullptor]

I used the cardboard because I kept seeing the light from the blinds in the reflection. The one thing I did try is taking a stupid amount of pictures tilting the camera every way, shooting at angles to prevent seeing things in the reflection or the flash. I took picture on M A S P and all the other settings. I tried it outside. I tried it at night because it was hard finding angles in any room that didn't show light from windows in the reflection or something else. I've been staging this thing all over my house. :wall:

 

[jharr]

Can you explain what you mean by "true macro" This is the only D type lens I have, so that is what I keep on the body most of the time. The reproduction ratio in macro mode is only 1:2, so I suppose that makes it sort of "pseudo-macro", but I mean how freakin' close do you need to get? The photos I posted are pretty close. I could have gotten closer, but why? Really what I would rather have than "true macro" is a faster lens. I have an old Nikkormat FTn with a nice 50mm f1.4 lens. That thing rocks in ambient light! I guess I could do the old 'hold it up to the camera backwards' trick, but it is hard to do with an AI lens since you have to hold the aperture lever closed manually. Of course if you are shooting wide open it doesn't matter, but then the DOF is waaaaay shallow and hard to keep things in focus hand-held.

Why are you using a Nikkor 28-105 (1:3.5-4.5 D) lens on macro mode? :? Your smithi pictures are ok, but you won't get true macro pictures with that lens.

 

[biomarine2000]

I used the cardboard because I kept seeing the light from the blinds in the reflection. The one thing I did try is taking a stupid amount of pictures tilting the camera every way, shooting at angles to prevent seeing things in the reflection or the flash. I took picture on M A S P and all the other settings. I tried it outside. I tried it at night because it was hard finding angles in any room that didn't show light from windows in the reflection or something else. I've been staging this thing all over my house. :wall:

Why dont you try taking the lid off the enclosure and shooting it from the top? You wont have to worry about reflection is that case. Thats how I take most of my pics. The ones I take through the enclosure usually come out semi blury.

 

[Talkenlate04]

Can you explain what you mean by "true macro" This is the only D type lens I have, so that is what I keep on the body most of the time. The reproduction ratio in macro mode is only 1:2, so I suppose that makes it sort of "pseudo-macro", but I mean how freakin' close do you need to get? The photos I posted are pretty close. I could have gotten closer, but why? Really what I would rather have than "true macro" is a faster lens. I have an old Nikkormat FTn with a nice 50mm f1.4 lens. That thing rocks in ambient light! I guess I could do the old 'hold it up to the camera backwards' trick, but it is hard to do with an AI lens since you have to hold the aperture lever closed manually. Of course if you are shooting wide open it doesn't matter, but then the DOF is waaaaay shallow and hard to keep things in focus hand-held.

Whoa there cowboy. I was merely asking a question.
That lens is not meant for macro. So while your pictures of the smithi are ok, they are no where near as good as they can be with a macro lens.
But if that is the only lens you have you do a great job of making it work to the best of its abilities.

Skullptor that is a cool setup by the way.

 

[Skullptor]

Why dont you try taking the lid off the enclosure and shooting it from the top? You wont have to worry about reflection is that case. Thats how I take most of my pics. The ones I take through the enclosure usually come out semi blury.

The only reason it was to be the final picture in the monitor thread. The front closes it in a bit more. The front is the first 3" on the side and narrows down the light coming in from the face by 2" on each side. The light is so dim you kind of need the front on to capture the soft glow it adds.

Skullptor that is a cool setup by the way.

Thanks. I appreciate that.

 

[jharr]

Sorry, I didn't mean to come off like that. Not offended, just curious what is considered "true macro". But since my last post, I did the 'hold the lens backward' thing just to see what I would get. Not too bad, eh? See the original size here

original resolution (cropped)

Whoa there cowboy. I was merely asking a question.
That lens is not meant for macro. So while your pictures of the smithi are ok, they are no where near as good as they can be with a macro lens.
But if that is the only lens you have you do a great job of making it work to the best of its abilities.

Skullptor that is a cool setup by the way.

 

[codykrr]

ok well guys...i went shopping today and i think i have found something that suits me....im looking at a nikon D80 it comes with 2 lens for 1,400...i liked the size weight and from what tinkering i done with it...seems pretty awsome!...i have a choice of 2 lenses so...my question is...what is a really good macro lens....and a really good lens for all rou nd shooting like people, scenery, sports, and in general distant objects....

 

[Talkenlate04]

First off awesome choice. :clap:

As for the macro lens, I have both the 105mm and the 60mm but I find myself using the 60mm more then the 105mm. They both take awesome shots that is for sure. The 60mm is better for outdoor every day close up shots of things you might see on a hike. I say that because very few people want to lug around the 105mm. (a bit bigger!)

A good walk around lens would be the 18mm - 200mm - F/3.5-5.6.
The 50mm fixed lens is awesome too I use it a lot.

 

[Craig]

Can you explain what you mean by "true macro" This is the only D type lens I have, so that is what I keep on the body most of the time. The reproduction ratio in macro mode is only 1:2, so I suppose that makes it sort of "pseudo-macro", but I mean how freakin' close do you need to get? The photos I posted are pretty close. I could have gotten closer, but why? Really what I would rather have than "true macro" is a faster lens. I have an old Nikkormat FTn with a nice 50mm f1.4 lens. That thing rocks in ambient light! I guess I could do the old 'hold it up to the camera backwards' trick, but it is hard to do with an AI lens since you have to hold the aperture lever closed manually. Of course if you are shooting wide open it doesn't matter, but then the DOF is waaaaay shallow and hard to keep things in focus hand-held.

True macro is defined as 1:1 magnification or higher i.e. 3:1.

 

[biomarine2000]

ok well guys...i went shopping today and i think i have found something that suits me....im looking at a nikon D80 it comes with 2 lens for 1,400...i liked the size weight and from what tinkering i done with it...seems pretty awsome!...i have a choice of 2 lenses so...my question is...what is a really good macro lens....and a really good lens for all rou nd shooting like people, scenery, sports, and in general distant objects....

Cody, if you haven't purchased yet you might want to look on ebay. I just did a quick search on the d80 and found tons of them used and new. There are package deals with 4 lenses for pretty good money. Quite a bit under $1400.

 

[Talkenlate04]

The only thing you have to worry about is the number of shutter clicks that could be on a used camera. It would be a pity to get a camera from a private party with no warranty and no one to turn to when things break. In my opinion if you are going to shell out money to upgrade you might as well do it right. My setup has a 6 year warranty covering the total value of the camera you just won't get that with a private party deal. If you do go that route look for someone that might be selling a registered MAC warranty with the camera, that would be a great way to go but really hard to find.

I would think about avoiding the kit and just buying the camera body new and the lenses separately, but with a choice of two new lenses that is a pretty good deal if you can get some decent glass to go with the camera. The lenses is where it is going to hurt the most anyway.