[kayasaman]

The 18-300 range does exist in mirrorless systems (Tamron 18-300 VXD) but only for crop sensors. Systems with ff sensors of 50mp or higher will provide 21mp in crop mode - but it is not very efficient to use a ff in crop mode all the time so this is only useful if there are additional ff uses needed. I’m not aware of any full frame 28-400 (This is roughly the same angle of view coverage on ff as the 18-300 on apsc) even for dslr systems. Clearly the 18-300 on apsc offers a huge flexibility, however, typically there are a lot of compromises made optically in lenses with this range.

Indeed; I checked the Tamron for compatibility and it didn't come up with any on the models of mirrorless I was looking at. That's why I made the statement I did.

For now at least I don't need to worry about it as Nikon have a native APS-C DSLR model.


I know there will be compromises, but the use case is important. It's a great walkabout lens with a crazy large range. It lets you grab a shot without changing lens. As long as the image is in focus there is really nothing else to worry about.

For specific needs there are better lenses, but unless you know exactly what you need it's very hard to select the right lens. Luckily if you find something really amazing that you want to shoot, you can always return with a dedicated superior lens provided said image is still reproducible (as in the subject doesn't move or you know that it will be in the area still later on ) :-)

---------- Post added 06-29-22 at 08:38 AM ----------

Just tried 500px and looks like they are quite strict about what you can and can't post....

Here's an album on Google Photos that I just created to show some Macro shots:

Macro - Google Photos

FYI: To others interested in this Google feature, it does use your allocated free space if you haven't purchased more storage.

[surfar]

Clearly the 18-300 on apsc offers a huge flexibility, however, typically there are a lot of compromises made optically in lenses with this range.

Tamron 18-300 VXD

All the reports of the 16.6x superzoom are extremely positive(from what Ive seen, which is lots)

Sony and Fuji are the only mounts but may come to RF and Z down the track.

In Fuji,specifically reports are in the 18-69 range is kills the Fuji 70-300! In the 70-300 its holds its own.

When its compared to 18-135 Fuji,Tamron shades it.

In Sony,compares favourably to the 70-350,but not above 300!

---------- Post added 06-30-22 at 02:39 PM ----------

For now at least I don't need to worry about it as Nikon have a native APS-C DSLR model.

Are you aware that Tamron have a F mount crop lens thats 18-400?It will be a lot lighter( 710gms) as a walk around than the Sigmas(which ever you choose)

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

The Nikon 200-500 doesn't have quite the range or top end reach. It might have many advantages optically and for AF

Testing the sigma 159-600 sport against the Nikor 200-500 they are pretty even in AF, the nikor was better when dealing with things at the closer end while the sport was better at further away tracking

When testing the sport against my $8000 nikon 200-400 II F4 sure the nikon was better ( much better for AF ) but from the standpoint of IQ and sharpness it really took the best conditions to see the differences

---------- Post added 06-29-2022 at 08:55 PM ----------

Macro.... this is interesting!! For me currently what's confusing is that everyone says that macro should be done using MF. Fine, for static subjects where you have time to set things up, it is not a problem. When things move then things become much more difficult.

There are times that I will use MF mostly for extreme macro work



How and what I used to take this photo MF was the only option



This was handheld and focused on the droplet



Again just handheld

---------- Post added 06-29-2022 at 09:07 PM ----------

Out of many attempts I got lucky once and nailed a great image. Sure AF would help a lot here but outside of the Nikon Micro range what other lenses have good and fast AF? The Tokina lenses are great optically but seem to use the old screwdrive AF system which I know from my FA*300 is a little clunky.

For myself I like to use FF from macro both with the D800 and D4 series cameras my go to is the nikon 60mm 2.8 that works really well with extension tubes the down side is that you have really short working distances ( but I kind of like that as it give a unique perspective to the images) and the second is the sigma 150 2.8 and also using the 1.4 TC from sigma. The sigma 150 gives you better working distance and when the tc is used gives you some more working distances.

100mm was something I felt like going with but there really was not that much of a difference over the 60mm. Tamron also has a 150mm AF lens ( I dont know much about it but people seem to like it that use it).

Macro is tricky when it comes to getting your field of view and magnification. If I want a FOV of 35mm on a cropped body the only way to get the increased magnification that a cropped body gives you, you have to get closer over what a FF will give you when using a 50mm or 60mm lens, when you shoot at the same working distance you get the same magnification.

[luftfluss]

There are enough gear combinations and subject scenarios that I think to believe there is a singular technique for macro is depriving oneself of the necessary flexibility to thoroughly explore and enjoy macro photography.

For example, this is manual focus, my eye to the OVF:




This time my arm is fully extended, I'm looking at the rear LCD, and using AF:




Different gear, different subjects, different techniques.

[kayasaman]

All the reports of the 16.6x superzoom are extremely positive(from what Ive seen, which is lots)

Sony and Fuji are the only mounts but may come to RF and Z down the track.

In Fuji,specifically reports are in the 18-69 range is kills the Fuji 70-300! In the 70-300 its holds its own.

When its compared to 18-135 Fuji,Tamron shades it.

In Sony,compares favourably to the 70-350,but not above 300!

---------- Post added 06-30-22 at 02:39 PM ----------



Are you aware that Tamron have a F mount crop lens thats 18-400?It will be a lot lighter( 710gms) as a walk around than the Sigmas(which ever you choose)

For the Tamron you mean this guy: 18-400mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD

It's priced similarly to the Nikon 18-300 though slightly cheaper. I wonder which one will have the better optical quality? Tamron build I think is a step or few down from Nikon due the use of more plastic. I'll start checking reviews and see if I can find any comparisons between them.

Thanks for pointing that out!! Looks like that's also something interesting to consider :-)

---------- Post added 06-30-22 at 04:15 AM ----------

Ian, luftfluss,

amazing images!!


Looks like there's more to understand with macro then I've been exposed to.

So here goes: what I have available right now is my K1 and Irix 150mm. For MF work it is a fantastic combination but I find myself shaking a lot when in macro 1:1 mode. The lens does have a 1.14ft or 34.5cm working distance. I probably need to learn how to use this better or use something like the Godox MF12 macro lighting system to increase the shutter (currently my settings are somewhere between 1/500s shutter and f5.6 and f8 with auto ISO in TAv mode).

A lot of the time I find that my subject is out of focus because I have moved around too much during camera positioning.


To combat this I thought about using an AF lens with the D500. Ian already suggested a few options being the Nikon 60mm and the Sigma 150mm.

I don't think the Sigma 150mm is available any more. At least it is not on their site listed in the 'current' lineup.

For my own selection I chose the Laowa's in Nikon mount but I can always grab them in Pentax mount instead. Perhaps they will work better on the FF with increased FoV.


The reviews I read about the Nikon 105mm basically said to stay away from it as it is not a great lens for the price.

Sigma does have a 105mm Macro with internal AF for quite low cost which might be an option. Optically reviews claim that it's good and overall a decent lens though some people say the build quality feels cheap.

I'm actually a little lost now in which direction to go into with this. It probably would be better to use a close focusing tele lens or true macro with AF for insects that don't sit still or in flight. Unless there is a sure fire technique that I can learn to hold an insect in focus in-camera.

Just as a side not - D500 will be delivered today :-)

[UncleVanya]

Macro is an area with a lot of different methods and techniques. If your hands are unsteady, try increasing ISO and shutter speeds and stop down a bit more and see if you can find your "floor" of stability and balance that against the depth of field and ISO influence of image quality. Try underexposing a bit and using raw and then lifting the shadows to see if that works also. Once you figure out your comfort zone then you can look at what lighting might add to the equation and decide if that path or simply switching to a tripod and a macro rail is a better one (or a combo of both). As for close focus vs. Macro - both can work wonders depending on the desired output.

Don't forget that the Raynox DCR-150/250, Canon 500D, and Nikon 4T/6T etc can all give fabulous results as well. They are not as flexible as a dedicated macro lens that focuses from infinity to 1:1 but they do work well in the right context and are easy additions to the bag which can be pulled out in a pinch. On top of that - with step rings they are brand agnostic and can be leveraged on both of your systems.

[kayasaman]

Macro is an area with a lot of different methods and techniques. If your hands are unsteady, try increasing ISO and shutter speeds and stop down a bit more and see if you can find your "floor" of stability and balance that against the depth of field and ISO influence of image quality. Try underexposing a bit and using raw and then lifting the shadows to see if that works also. Once you figure out your comfort zone then you can look at what lighting might add to the equation and decide if that path or simply switching to a tripod and a macro rail is a better one (or a combo of both). As for close focus vs. Macro - both can work wonders depending on the desired output.

Don't forget that the Raynox DCR-150/250, Canon 500D, and Nikon 4T/6T etc can all give fabulous results as well. They are not as flexible as a dedicated macro lens that focuses from infinity to 1:1 but they do work well in the right context and are easy additions to the bag which can be pulled out in a pinch. On top of that - with step rings they are brand agnostic and can be leveraged on both of your systems.

Interesting for you to suggest under-exposing. I normally run my K1 with -2EV compensation in general. I find that it does two things which seem to work for me. The first is that it doesn't blow out the highlights and secondly in lower light situations or when spot metering, it allows me to use a lower ISO.


Today, I played with f/13 which seemed to work better. Previously I was at f/5.6 and though I could get sharp images of the in-focus areas, I could never get enough of the insect in focus when I managed to land a side on shot.

I'm not sure if using f/22 would be more appropriate, though my previous experimentation used iso values that were simply too high eg. 12800 , if there was more light available it wouldn't be a problem to use such a high iso.


Meanwhile the D500 arrived and am just charging the battery right now. Currently I fitted the old Nikon FM lens on to the body. Let's see how this 1977-1982 lens will perform?? It's a 50mm f/1.8

20220630_194246.jpg - Google Drive

20220630_194254.jpg - Google Drive


Here are some more macro attampts with the K1 ii and Irix 150mm. One thing that seems to always get me with macro is minimum focusing distance. I tend to try to go too close which of course presents an out of focus image. What I need to get used to is that I don't need to be *that* close.... after all this lens has min. focus distance about the size of a ruler (just over). Down the list you can see some f/13 attempts. These are all processed a little in RawTherapee but mildly.

Macro - Google Photos

On this image I lifted the shadows as the area around the eyes was pretty dark. Not sure if I went too far?? It looks kinda ok to me though:

Google Photos


Hopefully once the battery of the D500 is charged I can see if it works and take a few test shots with this old grandpa grade lens :-)

[luftfluss]

Congrats on your new D500!

For macro - primarily insects and spiders - I shoot mostly f/10 - f/16, with a shutter speed of 1/500s or faster if my subject is moving.

There are a lot of things happening during a macro shot - subject movement, your movement, any kind of breeze at all - and not only does using a small aperture give you some leeway with focus accuracy...







... but can also help you get the insect's wings in focus, which coupled with motion blur can add a more dynamic touch to your photos, IMO...

[UncleVanya]

F22 is going to be well into diffraction adding softness to the images even where they are most sharp. I’ve certainly shot macro at f22 on occasion, but I try to avoid it.

[kayasaman]

Thank you for the tips @luftluss and @UncleVanya I really appreciate it

@luftluss those are some really nice images!! Where they shot on APC-C or FF?

[UncleVanya]

I’m partial to the D FA 100…

IMGP8785_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3951_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3928_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3831_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP8084 by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3889_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

Some might be from the old F 100 macro with the same basic optical formula.

[kayasaman]

I’m partial to the D FA 100…

IMGP8785_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3951_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3928_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3831_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP8084 by -vanya_42nd-

IMGP3889_DxO by -vanya_42nd-

Some might be from the old F 100 macro with the same basic optical formula.

Interesting! This is all APS-C based which virtually gives about 150mm in FF size.

In the macro world I'm a little confused about the difference between FF and AP-C. The focal length changes on APS-C but does the focusing distance change too? I wonder if it's just purely the FoV which becomes narrower??

I will need to share my static results too that I got using K1 Irix 150mm and tripod. I find tripod work and static subjects much easier because you have more time to setup the camera and focus and also try different things out like messing with the DoF etc... not to forget that you can also play around with the framing too.

It's probably well worth getting the 100mm Sigma for a bargain $400 just to have that extra AF feature if I need it. Though I don't want the AF system in the Nikon to make me lazy... haha

[luftfluss]

@luftluss those are some really nice images!! Where they shot on APC-C or FF?

Thank you. Photo #1 was shot with a m4/3 sensor + kit 12-60 + Raynox DCR-250 diopter lens. #2 was also shot with m4/3 sensor + kit 12-60, but this time with the Raynox DCR-150 diopter. #3 was shot with a Pentax K-70 (APS-C) + Tamron 90mm Macro lens.

In my previous post, the closeup of the Monarch butterfly was shot with the K-70 and Tamron Adaptall-2 180/2.5 lens + extension tube. So as you can see, I have been using different gear and different techniques in order to get my captures.

[kayasaman]

Thank you. Photo #1 was shot with a m4/3 sensor + kit 12-60 + Raynox DCR-250 diopter lens. #2 was also shot with m4/3 sensor + kit 12-60, but this time with the Raynox DCR-150 diopter. #3 was shot with a Pentax K-70 (APS-C) + Tamron 90mm Macro lens.

In my previous post, the closeup of the Monarch butterfly was shot with the K-70 and Tamron Adaptall-2 180/2.5 lens + extension tube. So as you can see, I have been using different gear and different techniques in order to get my captures.

Aha.... now I need an MFT camera too is what you're saying hahaha :P

I guess once you start using something and gain more experience with it, you get a feel for what works in which situation.

I'll try and grab the wasps with the 50mm Nikkor once they appear again and compare and contrast the working style. It's not a 1:1 lens by any means and the working distance is around 1.5ft or 45cm.

It will be nice to see how the new body handles which at the moment is the most important thing.

[luftfluss]

Aha.... now I need an MFT camera too is what you're saying hahaha :P

I guess once you start using something and gain more experience with it, you get a feel for what works in which situation.

I'll try and grab the wasps with the 50mm Nikkor once they appear again and compare and contrast the working style. It's not a 1:1 lens by any means and the working distance is around 1.5ft or 45cm.

It will be nice to see how the new body handles which at the moment is the most important thing.

Between the K-1 and D500, I think you are well-set