July 28, 2014, 08:39:55 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - RAKAMRAK

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810!!!
« on: June 29, 2014, 09:12:13 AM »
If anyone has a Canon EOS 5D III which has been pooped upon by Nikon's latest or not so latest offering then do not forget me. If you are trying to get rid of your pooped upon 5D3 please do not throw it into the dumpster in a doggy poop bag. Please pack and ship it to me. For the benefit of the community and recycling I am willing to make the ultimate sacrifice and accept all Nikon-poop-covered-5D3. And I am pretty certain since I am doing this due to the inherent goodness of my heart you will not ask for any reimbursement. Thank you.

PS: The offer is not limited to 5DIII alone, I am willing to help you get rid of any canon gear that has been pooped upon by Nikon gear (the free of cost offer still applicable).

2
The sodium vapour type lighting aside, I like the expressions in the third and fourth photo. Her flipping in the last photo is funny, although I trust it was unintentional - just the camera captured the wrong moment.

Loose the watch in the third photo.

The second photo does not look interesting to me.

3
Thanks a ton guys.

4
Photography Technique / Need suggestion or recommendation about glue
« on: June 03, 2014, 01:59:46 AM »
Do you guys have any experience with trying to securely stick a photo to another photo paper? Any suggestion which glue or adhesive works best?

I have ordered a photobook (lustre type paper) for a friend. The friend wanted to add couple of photos to the set but could not send me those in time. So they could not be included. I am planning to arrange the photos in a page (of the size of the phtoobook) and print them from somewhere. Then glue it inside the photobook once that comes  from the printing shop. Thanks for any helps.

5
Photography Technique / Re: Shoot from the rearend of the subjects.
« on: June 01, 2014, 05:52:05 PM »
Here is one from me


6
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: May 27, 2014, 11:55:20 AM »
Here is one that I took recently.

7
Photography Technique / White Optical Satin
« on: May 22, 2014, 04:49:07 PM »
Hello Fellow CRians, I have a (may be) odd questions for you.

Does any of you know whether sheets of white optical satin (the type that shoot through umbrella manufacturers use) can be bought and from where?

8
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: What's next, per Sigma Rumors site
« on: May 20, 2014, 06:00:36 AM »

Given that I'm very much amateur, if they can reach near enough to the same optical performance I'll forgive a bit of AF inconsistency for a few thousand dollars.

+1

9
Unless the object is flat, say a coin or a medallion, and the background is empty, say a flat colored background, the photos will not be the same.

It's just like portrait photography, with the nose looking too big relative to the ears when shooting from a short distance - perspective works for the front & back parts of the subject same as it works for the subject itself being in the foreground and other stuff being farther away in the background.

Therefore, if you shoot a diamond ring with the diamond facing the camera and the band away from it, the shorter the focal length the larger the diamond will look compared to the band.

This is actually the answer that I was looking for when I wrote the question. I had a hunch, but probably could not put my question properly. Thank you.

10
@100 Thanks for the link. But do you know any other source where I can get the 'effective focal length' information for the macros. The photozone website seems to have the information is only for the 100mm lenses. I will google it. But in case you know any other website please let me know. This is a very interesting piece of information.

11
Lenses / Re: Review: Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro
« on: May 02, 2014, 04:47:16 PM »
Received my 'working' copy of the Sigma 150mm OS. It is actually the second unit of the lens that the store had to send me. The first unit had its focus mechanism malfunctioning.

I did not have any chance to explore its image quality yet. But here is my first impression of 'handling' the lens. (disclaimer I have not handled any white L lens of Canon).

It seems like a piece of brick. It is actually heavier than it looks. The outer shell seems to use some metal parts - which gives it an even more 'heavy' and 'hunky' feel. The cylindrical hood is pretty large. on top of that if I put the hood adapter (recommended for APS-C cameras) then it almost doubles in length. The OS seems alright. I could handhold and get good sharp photos at 1/10 sec shutter speed.

12
Thank you CRians. So my hunch was more or less right that the background will be slightly different. But from your replies it seems that such difference won't really matter in most cases (in few cases it might though). What will matter mainly is the subject to front element distance - which is generally longer for longer FL macro lenses.

Anyway, day before yesterday I received my Sigma 150mm OS. Waiting for the weekend to explore its abilities at the local park.

13
John thank you for the replies.
Correct, the distance is from the film/sensor (the phi type symbol). I was kind of brushing over those issues (the 50mm needs an extender type thing as well for 1:1).

You are quite right that it that longer macros will have shallower depth of field. But I am specifically looking info about perspective - no one talks about that - may be because it is not important as such. But still.....

14
Right, at 1:1 the same object will occupy exactly the same area of the image. Till this my understanding is clear. But ten things get a bit fuzzy for me.

Do you mean that the focal length difference of macro lenses have no effect on the 'image' (for example from the point of view of perspective) at 1:1 magnification other than the usability (that is subject to lens front distance while capturing the photogrpah)?

15
Let me explain my question a bit further. I have seen/used only two macro lenses till date Canon 100mm L and sigma 150mm OS. That also at a distance of more than 1 year. So I had no opportunity to test this question of mine.

What I am asking is, let's say I am photographing a small flower (pretty small) which is not going to occupy the entire image at 1:1 (let's say on a full frame camera). Now if I use different macro lenses - 50mm (Canon), [60mm (Tamron or Canon)-APS-C only], 70mm (Sigma), 90mm (Tamron), 100mm (Canon), 105mm (Sigma), 150mm (Sigma) or 180mm (Canon/Sigma/Tamron) -  at 1:1 magnification focusing distance (varying the distance between the flower and my camera, of course) would I get the same image (not talking about sharpness here)? Probably this may be framed slightly differently, what is the importance and significance of the angle of view of different macro lenses at their minimum (or comparable magnification) focusing distances?

In case any of you have used more than one lenses at the same time you may have some idea about this. Any comment will be highly appreciated. Even better is if any of you have images like this to demonstrate the difference/similarities.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20