|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
04-02-2009, 11:35 PM
|
| |
Since you are asking for an honest answer, then it's a NO for me.
I applied my basic workflow on your shot, I believe it looks more 3D (at least for me.) Do hope you don't mind.
edit: try a shot with lesser distractions.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
04-02-2009, 10:07 PM
|
| |
Thx^^
Thx^^ I'm also waiting to see for myself, I know during my 1/2 yr break from photography, I worked on my composition. But then my hands aren't as steady, so I still can't take photos from more interesting angles, as you may need to twist and turn your body to get them.
Thx^^ I'm from Singapore.
Thx^^ I need to work on my holding technique, so it's back to basics for me:lol:
Thx^^ Reverse lens macro is not for that hard DSLR extreme macro, IF you can focus. Reason is it's A LOT lighter than normal macro setup, you don't need external flash (as long as u have a effect diffuser), the lens used is often prime lens, so it's light. Lesser stress on the arms, means more steady shot.
For diffuser I'm just using a piece of foam with a cross cut in the center;
A good way to approach insects is move slowly straight towards them and not move side ways. You'll find higher chance of success.
Focusing is just moving your camera towards and backwards till the subject is focus. There's no need to use the focus ring.
Problem with reverse lens or ext tube, you can't really focus at f16 or more narrow aperture, as it's just too dark. I just did a lighting setup to help focusing today, will share the setup if it works. It's just mounting a LED touch light onto a straight flash bracket.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
04-01-2009, 09:59 PM
|
| |
Thanks for all your kind words. Rusty as in compared to what I was able to do last yr:p
Went to try again just now, was trying to work on my composition. But seems to be harder than I'd expected at such magnification. My hands also not as steady as it was 6+ months back:bsmilie:
These shots are without crop, too bad some legs got cut off^^;
 |
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
04-01-2009, 05:57 AM
|
| |
Been out of action for a long time, think my macro also rusty:p
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-24-2008, 04:44 PM
|
| |
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is due to light fall off. It's quite common in Tamron lenses, just that on 17-50mm is a bit more. It's still able to give great result.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
09-23-2008, 05:51 PM
|
| |
Try using a graduated neutral density filter.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-20-2008, 06:07 PM
|
| |
Some test shots I took 1+ year back of this nice lens^^
There're some CA at times^^;
 |
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
09-18-2008, 06:57 PM
|
| |
Thx^^
Thx^^ I'm waiting for the weekend to have her go test it.
Thx^^
Thx^^ I never really print any of my photos for the wall yet, I never felt they are good enough >.< The lens bokeh render came as a big suprise, as it's only 1:5.3. If it's able to reach 1:3, I believe this lens bokeh will be unbelievable^^
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-18-2008, 07:27 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-18-2008, 05:33 AM
|
| |
Here are some old macros from the Tamron 90mm. The sharpness is good enough to withstand 2 close-up filters (Raynox DCR-250 + Vivitar+10) stacked onto it;)
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-18-2008, 04:19 AM
|
| |
When I was looking for my 1st macro lens, I went all over Singapore camera shops to test all 3 lenses and settled for Tamron. Like you all mentioned the lack of mm, also why my most used macro lens is the Vivitar S1 105mm.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no anti-Sigma. I know Sigma makes good lenses, I owned a few myself. But in terms of these 3 lenses go, the conclusion I'd got was the Tamron being the best value for money.
Tamron like Sigma makes good and bad lenses. Tamron 90mm Di happen to one of the best lens they made.
I'm a macro fan, I also understand they are all good lenses. If you were to give me all 3 lenses at once doing a same subject. In term of IQ, I'll say Pentax. But in terms of value for money. it's Tamron. The only reason I would had gotten a Sigma is for that few extra mm.
Edit: BTW I listed the lens not in any order, normally I'll add numbers in front if I want them to be in any order. e.g. 1.Pentax 2.Tamron 3.Sigma
As I mentioned they'll give all good result. Bokeh from my experience, Pentax is the best but Tamron is not far behind. I will not argue if anyone says Sigma 70mm or 150mm(I hoping for Pentax mount) better than Tamron 90mm, but not 105mm just lack the result of 70mm.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-18-2008, 02:07 AM
|
| |
* my requirements, macro (including bugs)
Tamron, Pentax & Sigma
* good portrait for street candids
Tamron, Pentax & Sigma
* good resolution at close-to-infinity subject distances.
Tamron, Pentax & Sigma
* resale value
Tamron & Pentax, these 2 are more porpular and Tamron seems to sell easier due to its lower price.
I went for Tamron as my 1st macro lens because it's a better value lens. It is said if you do compare all 3 lenses together, Sigma bokeh tends to loose out a little. In any case all 3 lenses will gave u good result for normal macro works^^
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-17-2008, 08:06 PM
|
| |
Grates on ur new lens, I'm sure you'll enjoy it like I have. Just a word of advise, do check if urs have any BF or FF. After testing for a few months, I finally sent mine back to Jap for calibration, as the FF is beyond -10 on K20D AF adjustment setting^^;
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-17-2008, 06:28 PM
|
| |
IIRC, I took this at 24mm
24mm is soft at f2.8 and start getting good at f4. Which is ok, as wider end normally we use with narrow aperture^^
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
09-17-2008, 06:24 PM
|
| |
Thx^^
Thx^^ She really love the bokeh this lens is able to produce which my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 can't^^;
Thx^^ I believe you can take similar shot, just need to look hard enough. There were like close 100 of this flower around the park, but only this one was able to give me the shot I want. Some grown too inwards, some had messy background, some flowers was slightly torn, etc.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
09-17-2008, 06:19 PM
|
| |
Thx for ur kind words^^
Thx^^
Yeap we are happy^^
Thx^^ I'd learnt to focus on photography than equipments. So when i mentioned I need to get another lens, she's really encouraging about it.^^ Think I'll only get the look when I say I need another flash^^; I have FBA:p
Thx^^ Yes she is. #3 I think was taken at 24mm it's soft at f2.8, but it gets good at f4.
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
09-16-2008, 11:21 PM
|
| |
During the last dog show my wife felt she need to use a wider lens than the FA 50mm f1.4. This made me pretty happy as she has taken a new step in her photography, so I went order the Sigma 24-60mm at US$200^^ She had always love the bokeh the 50mm gave, I think she'll be please with this Sigma as well^^
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-16-2008, 07:53 PM
|
| |
Here's my first impression of this lens as it finally arrived today. It's a really excellent lens for US$200. Though sharpness aren't as good as the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, but the bokeh is better^^ Can't do a compare with the Tamron as it should be in Japan now for calibration, but I'll do a compare with marcusyoung's Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 & K20D when I'm free.^^
Here are some f2.8@60mm shots out of K10D JPEG.
No USM or color correction, just resized & framed
At 100% crop
No USM or color correction, just resized and framed, like the bokeh? A little under cos forgot to EV+1 on flash^^;
No USM or color correction, 50% cropped, resized and framed under warm light.
Edit:
After smart sharpen and a little color correction
 |
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-16-2008, 07:31 AM
|
| |
No catch, that's the price quite a few ppl got it for. Mine should arrived tomorrow^^ Best value for money f2.8 stand zoom lens^^
Comparing Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 and Tamron 17-50mm f2.8;
The Sigma is a brighter lens and will be useful if you take shots in low light/high ISO condition. I came to this conclusion during a dog show event where I was using Tamron and my wife using Sigma. Her shots came out brighter (due to falloff I think) which helped lessen the noise in ISO1600 of K10D.
The Tamron is sharper and lighter. The weight factor will be useful if you are doing events for like 10-12 hrs.
If you do indoor events a lot I suggest you get either the DA* 16-50mm or Tamron 17-50mm or Sigma 18-50mm. 24mm or 28mm maybe troublesome in some room shots^^;
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-07-2008, 06:24 AM
|
| |
IMHO, if you want true macro, you have to use a real macro lens or macro alternatives (ext tube, reverse lens, CU filter, etc). 50-500mm is more for taking wild life, it can't give u a f2.8 or f4 when you need. For normal bugs and flowers a macro lens with 70 to 125mm will do. In Singapore most bought 180mm (regards of camera brand) to hunt for butterflies.
You want silky smooth bokeh, it'll pretty much on ur lighting control and the background. These lens should help you with better bokeh; Pentax A*/FA* 200mm F4, voigtlander 125mm, vivitar/lester dine/kiron 105mm, Sigma 70mm, Pentax F 100mm f2.8, Tamron 90mm Di and even FA 100mm f2.8. The rest of the macro lenses tends to give a less smooth bokeh, not that they are bad. Just that those lens mentioned tends to stand out more.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
08-06-2008, 10:35 PM
|
| |
I bought mine 3 weeks ago use without box and pouch for S$100 (abt US$73), which I thought was a very resonable price. But how did it jump so much?:hmm: Are ppl that desperate or is someone jacking up the price^^;
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
08-06-2008, 06:24 PM
|
| |
I'm not trying to hit a quota like u had mentioned. It's like looking at a preview in a movie, if you feel a movie preview aren't worth your time and money will you still sit through that 2 hrs and then review it's bad?
Do note that the PPG is for International Pentax users, and the loading time is different depending where you are from. For me it takes about 1-3mins to load 5 shots, I'll need review those 5 before I can moved on to another 5.
Again not about quota, sad to say that some shots aren't worth the time to load. You can tell a bad or average shot when you see one in thumbnail (at least for me). Example if you see a single flower macro shot in thumbnail, the messy background is sharper than the flower, would you still bother looking at the full shot? Unless the title is something like "Speck of dust on sensor", I won't bother going to view it full. Another example, a thumbnail shots a landscape sunset shot, but the color is just too bright and not interesting, nor is there any other subject on the sea. Would you still view it full?
Edit: For me, if a shot shows the focus subject is right in center with lots of space around and distracting element(s). Normally I'll put a NO regardless what size it's in. It's just not gallery quality. I'm also quite particular about macros, to me it's not just being sharp. If you show a simple bug on flower with not enough bokeh and wrong angle, I'll also put a NO regardless if it's thumbnail or full 14MP shot.
The PPG gave us a freedom to choose if we want to view it full, so if you really have problem with judging of thumbnails, I suggest you take it up with PPG. They can make us vote with 600+px if they feel you had proven your point;)
|
|
Forum: Post Your Photos!
08-03-2008, 07:20 PM
|
| |
Real cute^^ Love his eyes^^
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
08-03-2008, 07:09 PM
|
| |
To be honest (hope u won't get offended), I may had given a NO for these IF they are displayed together with 4 or 3 other outstanding images during voting.
#1 It tends to be safe to attract people with high contrat/staturation colors, but once you overdo it, it kills the photos. Take into consideration when you do your post process, as most people do not have the same screen color calibration as you. It's always safe to do in moderation regardless of color, exposure, etc.
#2 It just don't stand out enough for PPG. Most PPG macros or abstract are beyond normal composition, they are truly excellent (by standard of majority). One thing that might put ppl off is the WB and lack of color. Not much interesting factor in the shot to make ppl want to put YES.
Edit: I'll do this when I'm voting, if an image doesn't look appealing enough in thumbnail, I won't even bother to view it at 600 pixel^^; There are just too many shots in voting. Maybe one should consider the thumbnail version, before submiting?
|
|
Forum: Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories
08-03-2008, 06:53 PM
|
| |
Some of the 1st studio shots I did for Yoshi^^
 |
