50mm with +3 close up filter macro attempts

Thecageyone

Any real macro I've done up to now has been with the old bridge cam which had a 'super' macro mode, it could get in very, very close.

Since upgrading to a dslr I rarely use it, but I've no real macro lens. I have a 50mm minolta f/1.7 and a Hoya +3 macro ext-filter. here's my first real testers for it -



Also, which do you prefer between the colour, or B&W of this one:





All comments welcome [But at least read the blatantly obvious in this post, and note it is not a C&C thread as such, I ask which you prefer, if neither ... why bother posting?]

VisionaryP

Colour, definitely.

Now get yourself out to the garden and find some bees. Perfect for practicing macro shots.

Thecageyone

Yeah, I remember chasing them around the garden last summer, but caught mostly flies.

hbr

Thecageyone wrote: »

I have a 50mm minolta f/1.7 and a Hoya +3 macro ext-filter. here's my first real testers for it

Very nice! Thanks for posting these Cagey. The only thing I have missed since I upgraded to a DSLR is the excellent macro mode of my Lumix FZ28 bridge camera.

How does the macro filter work? Does it increase the effective focal length (increased magnification), or does it allow you focus closer to the subject?

Thecageyone

It does a bit of both, it allows the 50mm focus in a bit closer plus magnifies. The 50mm on it's own doesn't let you get very close in, the filter definitely makes a difference. I must do some direct comparisons with and without the macro filter.

hbr

Thecageyone wrote: »

It does a bit of both, it allows the 50mm focus in a bit closer plus magnifies. The 50mm on it's own doesn't let you get very close in, the filter definitely makes a difference. I must do some direct comparisons with and without the macro filter.

Thanks Cagey.

oshead

Thecageyone wrote: »

Also, which do you prefer between the colour, or B&W of this one:

Made me think of that joke. Which of the spice girls is your favorite? In reply you'd say, What do you mean favorite? I hate them all.

In all seriousness, I don't like any of them. Technically they look kind of OK. Probably not true macro, more closeup shot. It's hard to tell scale. But..... What's made me comment here is this. They are boring, unimaginative, look like test shots and shouldn't be published IMO. The diopter works and that should be enough for you to go out and get better more interesting shots.

In contrast, the insect shots look bright and colorful and kind of On-the-edge. I think they are very good. It's easy to tell the little critters could've hopped off at any second, so just getting a shot in is an achievement in itself. Never mind that they are technically good too.

So, In short, What do you mean prefer?

punkindrublic

Firstly..they don't really look like true macro shots to me. Close up..yes but not macro. The coloring on the first one looks a little..odd? Almost looks like the colorize tool in Photoshop was used to make it pink. I do prefer the colour though.

Thecageyone

punkindrublic wrote: »

Firstly..they don't really look like true macro shots to me. Close up..yes but not macro. The coloring on the first one looks a little..odd? Almost looks like the colorize tool in Photoshop was used to make it pink. I do prefer the colour though.

As said, I messed about with the yellow in Lightroom, I wasn't going for natural, again, it was merely for testing the range. And they are more close ups, it says "close up filter macro attempts", but these are pretty tiny little flowers. And I do not have a macro lens ... Thanks.


I don't mind people with imaginative work themselves criticising something that wasn't even asking for it, but when it's someone with a boring, lifeless stream ... no-no. Obviously I'm referring to Oshead.

Calina

This train has trainwrecked.

OP - here is how things work - you put photos up for criticism, you cannot then reject that criticism if it's reasoned. It is absolutely more in your line to take the criticism on board and learn from it. You will learn far more from negative feedback than you will from anything else and oshead is one of the best macro specialists on this board.

Now either you and stick-dan knock off the fighting in this thread and deal with the subject - which in this case - is YOUR photography and not anyone elses, or I will lock the thread and start issuing bans.

The objective of asking for advice and feedback here is - generally - to learn stuff. That does occasionally involve negative comments. If you want to learn, you cannot be precious about the feedback particularly if it is to some extent, constructive. You also - let me make this absolutely clear - should NOT post other people's photographs in thread without their permission first.

This thread lives until I have to go out. If I see one more back and forward between the two of you I will - at the very least - close it.

I'm cleaning out the off topic he said/he said nonsense out of this post in the hope that you might get back onto the topic of your photographs.

Thecageyone

stick-dan wrote: »

I'm looking forward to my next C&C thread now :cool:

I'd only ever be honest ... and only if asked

I'm really a nice guy, just can't take uppidy people. Was no need for ultimate negativity towards off the cuff images loike!

Thecageyone

Calina wrote: »

This train has trainwrecked.

OP - here is how things work - you put photos up for criticism, you cannot then reject that criticism if it's reasoned. It is absolutely more in your line to take the criticism on board and learn from it.

No I didn't. I thought "C&C" in the title asked for that?

I asked which looked better ... and comments welcom on the macro-ness or lack of. Someone jumping in and simply saying "hate them, boring, uninteresting" is not constructive in this case. So Unless you delete that needless negativity there is cliquey-ness afoot.

oshead

Thecageyone wrote: »

Did you purposely skip over the part where I clearly said these were just TESTERS? And to be Frank, after having a quick look at your stream, I'll take your comments with a huge chunk of salt. Speaking of jokes like. Nice poodle ... Also, very hypocritical, your winter garden shots on here are even duller! And they weren't testers!? Where do you get off? lol.


I'm serious:



You're trying to tell me that's interesting? You must think so as you put your name to it and framed it! I'm so glad I looked further into your stuff, or I'd have really felt like I was bad. The only thing that could possibly make that a duller, more boring shot, is if it was a little more central than it already is.


Even if you hated them, which, trust me, i don't really care, you'd still have a preference .... unless you're colour blind?

getting used to these negative comments for the sake of it around here This thread doesn't even state they're for C&C. But since it's a free for all, maybe I'll review your winter garden shots? As I could take infinitely better and more interesting shots than those any given day

I didn't ask if they were any good to begin with, I said they were testers, to see what the 50mm + filter could achieve. I didn't put a whole heap of thought into the interestingness and as for boring ... about as boring as the average close up flower shot then huh? .... your post is just ridiculous to be honest.

And I know the insect shots are good, I didn't ask for C&C on them. They were taken with a bridge camera, no 'Real' macro on that either. I only posted them to shot I have ... shot insects, in the past, in response to first replier.

The yellow flowers above are only about the size of a 2 cent coin in circumference. The pink one ... actually about the same. They're not huge overgrown daffodils that some people think a full wide view of = macro. And I don't think shallow dof auto-a good flower shot makes. You should probably do a lot of online tutorials and re-do your flower garden set.

---

The spiral one? seen better, it's good but I'd not feel the urge to look at it again. Maro of a bee ... well, nice. If I'd not had to almost touch the glass of those flies to get that close as I only had a bridge cam, I'm sure they'd be as spectacular.

My retaliation comments were to be taken with a pinch of salt also, It just seemed his post was delivered with an air of elitism/snobbery/high-horsey-ness, and I expected maybe to be stunned by his flower shots if he thought these were so hatable. See, he didn't just say ... don't like them, he said he hated them and they were only shown as 50mm + a cheap extension testers.

Stop, will you. You've got issues with me just because you didn't specifically ask for a C&C. So what. Why get so bothered about it? My initial intention was to try and help. Next time you can shove it where the sun don't shine.

Thecageyone

oshead wrote: »

Stop, will you. You've got issues with me just because you didn't specifically ask for a C&C. So what. Why get so bothered about it? My initial intention was to try and help. Next time you can shove it where the sun don't shine.

I prefer help from people with imagination. Your comment was not helpful, it was a joke.

Calina

Thecageyone wrote: »

No I didn't. I thought "C&C" in the title asked for that?

I asked which looked better ... and comments welcom on the macro-ness or lack of. Someone jumping in and simply saying "hate them, boring, uninteresting" is not constructive in this case.

You requested feedback. You got feedback. The border between "which looks better" and C&C is minimal.

Thecageyone

Calina wrote: »

You requested feedback. You got feedback. The border between "which looks better" and C&C is minimal.

Should be in the rules then. I wanted actual feedback on the closeness, saying they're uninteresting and boring isn't helpful, it's bait for retaliation. Shouldn't have lowered myself, I know ...

Anyway, it's too nice a day to be in here talking who hates what, get out and take some pictures I'm off on me bike now. Maybe I'll treat you to a C&C later where you can let loose all your hatred! :P

Chorcai

Interesting reading.

Anyways, quick question or 2, did you use a flash and tripod ? how much roughly for a set of those close up lens things ?

I like them all maybe mess around with the black and white one a bit more ? To me it seems a bit flat ?

lee_baby_simms

Chorcai wrote: »

how much roughly for a set of those close up lens things ?

I was just looking for some myself.

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/4816792/art/allcam/zeikos-ze-cu452-multi-coa.html

Chorcai

lee_baby_simms wrote: »

I was just looking for some myself.

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/4816792/art/allcam/zeikos-ze-cu452-multi-coa.html

for 25€ where could ya be going wrong ! I know it wont beat a true 1:1 marco lens but could be fun I think.

CabanSail

Thecageyone wrote: »

Should be in the rules then. I wanted actual feedback on the closeness, saying they're uninteresting and boring isn't helpful, it's bait for retaliation. Shouldn't have lowered myself, I know ...

If you have a problem with a post on this, or any other forum on Boards, you do NOT retaliate. The correct action is to use the Report Post button. Retaliation can, and has, ended with a ban.

Chorcai

Chorcai wrote: »

for 25€ where could ya be going wrong

By buying them on Pixmania. eBay's cheaper;


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/52MM-CLOSE-UP-LENS-KIT-MACRO-FILTER-SET-1-2-4-10-NEW_W0QQitemZ170469385531QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_CameraAccessories_CameraLensesFilters_JN?hash=item27b0c4653b


(if they're the same thing, that is. Looks like a very similar product to me).


Oshead has some fantastic photographs in his stream in my opinion, but that's irrelevant


Cageyone, what filter did you use? What magnification, i mean? x1, x2, x4, x10, etc.?

Don't suppose you'd be willing to go to the effort of taking another two shots? One with the filter, one without?



Also, I prefer the colour one. The yellow is nice and strong. Flowers are known and liked for their colour. Black and white, in my opinion, should be used only in dark, violent, bloody or graphic photographs. It's so overused in my opinion. It seems to me that people just use black and white for the sake of it in a lot of photos I see (not all, but most).

Thecageyone

CabanSail wrote: »

If you have a problem with a post on this, or any other forum on Boards, you do NOT retaliate. The correct action is to use the Report Post button. Retaliation can, and has, ended with a ban.

Worried about being banned for standing up for myself in the right?, I think not. Retaliation was the WRONG word, it was a response that was warranted I believe. His post was bait, doesn't mean it's what I did. But I shouldn't have bothered.

Someone being especially unhelpful to a noob photographer so forcefully - He was totally and utterly unhelpful considering what I originally asked and then being backed up made it even worse. But I can laugh it off. My posts should not have been deleted, but it just makes the original instigator look worse.

From someone with who puts their signature to boring, lifeless flower shots, posts that tester flower shots are boring and uninteresting, it makes you wonder. Why are some so far up their rears they feel the need to piss on anything new members try? No matter what it may be. I thought this area was meant for seeking help/advice/tips ... y'know? not someone supposedly helpful jumping in with "THAT IS BORING, hate it!" for no good reason. I'd hang these testers any day before some of his serious work, and that's being honest. That is opinion too. Why should mine be canned?


No need for knickers in twists though. Seriously, do Mods pass every message of someone standing up for themselves around? How about passing around the fundraiser in my sig eh? And be actually helpful


Thanks Chorcai, No flash and no tripod used. Just light from the kitchen window. I really did just want to test the filter. I got the filter free but I'd say you could find them for about a tenner a piece. It does make a difference, without the filter I couldn't get near as close, you know what 50mm focusing can be like? these were some tiny flowers. Not full macro for sure, but you can see they maintain nice detail in the petals and drops.

Thecageyone

Deleted User wrote: »

By buying them on Pixmania. eBay's cheaper;


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/52MM-CLOSE-UP-LENS-KIT-MACRO-FILTER-SET-1-2-4-10-NEW_W0QQitemZ170469385531QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_CameraAccessories_CameraLensesFilters_JN?hash=item27b0c4653b


(if they're the same thing, that is. Looks like a very similar product to me).


Oshead has some fantastic photographs in his stream in my opinion, but that's irrelevant


Cageyone, what filter did you use? What magnification, i mean? x1, x2, x4, x10, etc.?

Don't suppose you'd be willing to go to the effort of taking another two shots? One with the filter, one without?



Also, I prefer the colour one. The yellow is nice and strong. Flowers are known and liked for their colour. Black and white, in my opinion, should be used only in dark, violent, bloody or graphic photographs. It's so overused in my opinion. It seems to me that people just use black and white for the sake of it in a lot of photos I see (not all, but most).

I just have the one x3 filter. x4 and x10 should give nice resuslts, and I'm sure even with this one i could have maybe gotten in closer. I agree on the black and white, It is a bit flat and lifeless, just a tester mind! It was more the detail/texture/sharpness i wanted to see the difference in. There was nothing really composed here, I just placed them on white paper by a window, and shot of a few rounds focusing on different spots. probably spent more time processing, well, about 10 minutes doing that total.

I will do up some kind of comparison for anyone interested I think you can buy packs that include the x4 and x10?

DaireQuinlan

Thecageyone wrote: »

From someone with who puts their signature to boring, lifeless flower shots, posts that tester flower shots are boring and uninteresting, it makes you wonder.

This (and some of your other comments above) is pretty unacceptable IMO for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, you asked for C&C, not oshead. It's been said several times, if you don't want criticism or you can't take it, then don't post pictures for C&C. It's not acceptable to start in on another members photostream merely because they gave you what you regard as negative criticism. It reflects worse on you than it does on oshead.

I've reported your post aswell.

oshead

Weather you are right or wrong is not the issue. You have a serious attitude problem and your ego is totally tied up in a few stupid images. Did I say stupid? Don't take offence. No matter how boring or **** my photos may seem to you.

<SNIP>

Here is the original Winter Garden C&C request for you if you'd like to comment in a proper fashion.