![]() |
|
|||||||
| Cameras, Lenses and Accessories Discuss macro help...could anybody advise me on a decent macro lens and also accesroise i.e tripods,filters whatever else would be advantageous to ... |
|
Welcome to the Pixalo Photography Community. As a Guest you are free to browse the site, but see what extras you get as a Member here.
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Been here a while
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: sheffield uk
Posts: 365
![]() ![]() |
macro help
could anybody advise me on a decent macro lens and also accesroise i.e tripods,filters whatever else would be advantageous to own on a budget compatible with the sonya350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Pixalo Crew
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Peak District
Posts: 10,779
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: macro help
Rather dependant on subject but for bugs, etc I recommend at least 100mm, as less than that you really do have to be close to the subject.
Personally, I use the Sigma 105mm and 150mm both of which are excellent but have also used the Canon 100mm which is equally good. Using MF I find the 105mm easier (shorter barrel rotation to focus) whilst the 150mm has a tripod collar making flipping between landscape and portrait very quick. I find the Sigma supplied lens hood particularly useful to protect the lens, especially when in foliage, but also when I remove the lens and place in my bag (tend to swap between macro and 300mm fairly often!) Tripod's good for a steady platform but is a bit of a pain dragging threough grass so a monopod makes it a little more flexible - I try to avoid handheld as the high(ish) shutter speed (to prevent cmaera shake) precludes a decent DOF
__________________
~CanonCreativity + SigmaSurReality~ by ΜΛЯΚ |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Been here a while
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: sheffield uk
Posts: 365
![]() ![]() |
Re: macro help
your a star i want to do macro of insects, and flowers so im guessing not knowing much about macro methods sigma 105 is so you are a little further away from the subject?
i was looking at the tramron 90mm f2.8 i think it is looks pretty interesting. also saw a review and mentioned that the sigma was a prime lens can anyone tell me what this means might be a nooby question but im just staring of my new life and want to learn as much as i can about the slr's as i want to be able to try n make a career or other income from photography when i have the ability to take photos like some of the ppl on here thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Pixalo Crew
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Peak District
Posts: 10,779
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: macro help
Yup, the Tamron has good reports so think you'd find that good
Prime is when the lens is only at one focal length - so no zoom capability. Seen as 'better' lenses as all the effort is put into making it optimal at that one focal length and not having to compromise across other lengths (aside from being simpler in construction, employing less glass) |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Been here a while
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: sheffield uk
Posts: 365
![]() ![]() |
Re: macro help
i have looked into it a bit more and i think ive limited the choice to three;
the tamron 90mm, the sigma 105mm, and sonys own SAL-100mm i started off liking the tamron now im swaying to the sigma and know nothing about the SAL. i know that the tamron is a prime lens but unclear about the resti thought the sigma was but im looking at diffo sites that are confusing me as i said i want to take macro of insects mostly with the ability to do anything else flowers etc. my cam is sony a350 they are all compatible. open to othersuggestions thati can look into cheers the sigma sitesays it has compatible mount anyway Last edited by aideyhoward; 18-09-2008 at 13:52. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
New here
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London
Posts: 61
![]() ![]() |
Re: macro help
Hi, thanks for asking the 'prime question' - I have just started looking into buying a macro lens and I'm sure that knowledge will come in useful. This is probably a daft question but the disadvantage of a prime lens is presumably that you have to move yourself rather than the zoom doing it for you? is that right? How does this work in practice - does it tend to freak the insects out if you start moving in on them meaning you would actually get better pics with a zoom? or doesn't it work that way?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
Pixalo Crew
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Peak District
Posts: 10,779
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: macro help
Only daft question is the one that doesn't get asked!
Just to confirm: a prime lens is one where you cannot alter the focal length i.e. non-zoom Yes, you do tend to move to frame the shot or, more likely with a macro, focus the shot but it's easier (translates as cheaper) to come up with a fixed focal length macro lens. Personally, I much prefer a prime lens for doing shots for myself (more challenging and so more interesting) whereas I concede that I might use a zoom for commissioned shots (when the need to get a shot overrides the need to get the most interesting shot! )So, yes, you do move closer to get a macro shot. I'll get one when still a way off (as a banker shot) and then gradually move in. Moving without sudden movements and going 'head-on' so you're not obviously moving all helps. Ironically, the one action that seems to be the biggest scare factor is not the move in but the hand to the barrel to focus - but that's often when I'm tripoded and settled with the shot lined up |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|