Macro on Rope

Shima · May 27, 2005

I love these shots, thoughts?

.

.
This one's a little too bright and photoshop just couldn't fix it up right, but it's still pretty neat:

Netgarden · May 27, 2005

Hi Shima, how much closer can you get to that rope? I love the textures of old rope, and would love to see the pic alot closer. Did you crop it at all? What camera? You know what would be cool, is to lower your F number, and the background would be more blurred so the rope would stand out more.

I love your album! Well done! I see you live not too far from Laguna? I live between Orange and Laguna. great shots at the beach.

Shima · May 27, 2005

::points to section under avatar:: I live in Long Island... my cousin lives in Orange... I flew out there last week... Wish I lived there though! (and all pictures were taken by myself in that CA gallery, except for of course any where I'm in them in which case my cousins took them).

I'll try and get closer, there was no cropping done on that one. I use a Kodak DX6340 currently, not the best of camera's, but for now it serves its purpose.

Glad you enjoyed my pictures ^_^ I shoot for fun mainly... looking to upgrade my camera currently (considering the Canon G6 after some discussion on dgrin with others).

EDIT: Went into my manual settings and did what you said... it couldn't focus on the rope at all when I fiddled with it, it would only focus on the rope in Macro, and in Macro I have no control over the f/stop.

Did I mention I want to upgrade this camera :P

Netgarden wrote:

Hi Shima, how much closer can you get to that rope? I love the textures of old rope, and would love to see the pic alot closer. Did you crop it at all? What camera? You know what would be cool, is to lower your F number, and the background would be more blurred so the rope would stand out more.

I love your album! Well done! I see you live not too far from Laguna? I live between Orange and Laguna. great shots at the beach.

Netgarden · May 27, 2005

Nice to meet you Shima, your talents are showing with your 3.2 as well! G6 is supposed to be great.

Well I got to go to Long Island last year, and may this year. My son played against the Ducks [LI Ducks/baseball] this year so we took a trip back east to watch him. I hope to use my new camera there this year. He plays in New Jersey, its really nice back there. We also got to go to Atlantic City area for games.

Shima wrote:

::points to section under avatar:: I live in Long Island... my cousin lives in Orange... I flew out there last week... Wish I lived there though! (and all pictures were taken by myself in that CA gallery, except for of course any where I'm in them in which case my cousins took them).

I'll try and get closer, there was no cropping done on that one. I use a Kodak DX6340 currently, not the best of camera's, but for now it serves its purpose.

Glad you enjoyed my pictures ^_^ I shoot for fun mainly... looking to upgrade my camera currently (considering the Canon G6 after some discussion on dgrin with others).

Shima · May 27, 2005

What sort of camera do you use? And I edited my above post, so read the edit... going to upload the few I just took, but had to do them all on macro... as I stated above, can't get a focus out of the kodak when I put it into manual for such up close shots ;_; Much sadness there... What part of LI did you get to see? I'm a south shore girl myself, going to post some creek pictures later since I live right next to the creek

Netgarden wrote:

Nice to meet you Shima, your talents are showing with your 3.2 as well! G6 is supposed to be great.

Well I got to go to Long Island last year, and may this year. My son played against the Ducks [LI Ducks/baseball] this year so we took a trip back east to watch him. I hope to use my new camera there this year. He plays in New Jersey, its really nice back there. We also got to go to Atlantic City area for games.

Shima · May 27, 2005

Ok, sorry for not being able to get the fstop to lower while also focusing

so just more regular macro stuff on my camera until I get one with the ability to let me control it's fstop on macro AND focus!

First one though is not that old rope, but I saw it as I walked out the back door and just HAD to photograph it:

.

Shima · May 28, 2005

Took a picture of the rope on an Olympus E-10 (my dad let me borrow his camera).

nzmacro · May 29, 2005

The second lot of shots are now getting to where its really good. I looked at the first set awhile ago and agree, they need to be isolated more to separate them from the background. In the second set, its getting there Shima.

Nice lines, curves and textures for sure. Your selective focus is bang on. I would be tempted to use a simple +1 dioptre on the front. That would still probably allow the ratios here with being able to blur the background a lot more. A +3 will get you closer but will blur the background even more. You have a darn good eye for a shot. Never stop being different, its great to see

Danny.

Shima · May 29, 2005

Sounds like a plan, now to learn how one changes this dioptre setting on my dad's camera... (still learning technical details since my kodak offers bare minimal manual settings that don't even work that well, as compared to my dad's camera which offers so many controls....)

Glad you've enjoyed my shots so far

nzmacro wrote:

The second lot of shots are now getting to where its really good. I looked at the first set awhile ago and agree, they need to be isolated more to separate them from the background. In the second set, its getting there Shima.

Nice lines, curves and textures for sure. Your selective focus is bang on. I would be tempted to use a simple +1 dioptre on the front. That would still probably allow the ratios here with being able to blur the background a lot more. A +3 will get you closer but will blur the background even more. You have a darn good eye for a shot. Never stop being different, its great to see

Danny.

Netgarden · May 29, 2005

Hi Cat, [if you prefer]
I can see you are hooked now!

Maybe you can find a good price on a used camera. I know theres alot out there, and someone said to comb the nearest Sears, as they have a few discontinued items laying around. One guy got a Sony 717, an awesome camera, for $349.

The second set is great. Keep at it, and most important enjoy the hobby. I wish I had started when I was younger! I really missed out on recording my life, especially with raising the kids and sports. [I was an athlete so was too busy to pick up a camera for sure]. I bet you are really active, and admire your fast learning pace. You definately have the creative knack.

Shima wrote:

Sounds like a plan, now to learn how one changes this dioptre setting on my dad's camera... (still learning technical details since my kodak offers bare minimal manual settings that don't even work that well, as compared to my dad's camera which offers so many controls....)

Glad you've enjoyed my shots so far

Shima · May 29, 2005

I've been into photography for fun for the past few years... during the school year college life and classes just keeps me too busy to sit back and spend an hour outside fiddling w/ the camera... that and my Kodak is only sometimes good at doing waht I want it to...

Been having a blast on my dad's Olympus E-10 since I can flip it into macro and then when it has any issues, I can just control the focus manually.... ah the beauty of switching between the two...

Also, I go to college several states over, so borrowing family camera's doesn't happen often either, heh.

And currently I'm looking into purchasing some sort of prosumer camera (possibly a canon g6)... though a few people on the other thread were reccomending I just wait until I can afford an actual dslr.. so we'll see what happens... still trying to find stores that actually have the g6 in stock... need to be able to fiddle with a camera before I make up my mind on whether or not its worth the price.

Netgarden wrote:

Hi Cat, [if you prefer]
I can see you are hooked now! Maybe you can find a good price on a used camera. I know theres alot out there, and someone said to comb the nearest Sears, as they have a few discontinued items laying around. One guy got a Sony 717, an awesome camera, for $349.

The second set is great. Keep at it, and most important enjoy the hobby. I wish I had started when I was younger! I really missed out on recording my life, especially with raising the kids and sports. [I was an athlete so was too busy to pick up a camera for sure]. I bet you are really active, and admire your fast learning pace. You definately have the creative knack.

nzmacro · May 29, 2005

A +1 or a +3 dioptre is just a close up filter thats added to the front of the lens. Like a magnifying glass for a camera lens. I would suggest you start with simple and cheap. Then when you find you really want more macro and get serious about it, then look at a Canon 250D or a Nikon 6T. Those are similar again, but slightly more expensive and better corrected. Sorry I should have just said close up filter.

They will allow you get a larger macro ratio and blur the background as well with wider apertures.

All the best Shima, keep them coming

Danny.

Shima · May 29, 2005

Ah ok! Thanks a lot for the explanation...

Well, I currenly only own the Kodak Easyshare (which does not have the ability to change or add things onto that lens)... as I've mentioned and is in my sig though, i'm working on finding myself a new camera... so once I get a camera where that can be used on, I'll definitly make it one of my priority buys since macro is my favorite thing to do...

The Olympus E-10 can change lens and fiddle with filters and things... but it's my dad's camera, I'm just borrowing it for usage around here while I'm home. (And I'm only still home for just under 2 more weeks...)

nzmacro wrote:

A +1 or a +3 dioptre is just a close up filter thats added to the front of the lens. Like a magnifying glass for a camera lens. I would suggest you start with simple and cheap. Then when you find you really want more macro and get serious about it, then look at a Canon 250D or a Nikon 6T. Those are similar again, but slightly more expensive and better corrected. Sorry I should have just said close up filter.

They will allow you get a larger macro ratio and blur the background as well with wider apertures.

All the best Shima, keep them coming

Danny.

nzmacro · May 29, 2005

Hmm, how about your dad donates the E-10 to a worthy cause in that case

. The Oly E-10 is an excellent camera IMHO and maybe your dad needs a new camera anyway

.

Lets see, if you don't want a full system Dslr kit and the expense of lenses to go with them, maybe you could look at something else. A Dslr could be an investment because the lenses become yours anyway. There are many capable cameras for macro out there. Most are fine with just a Nikon 6T on the front. You don't need the latest and greatest and maybe something that is about to be replaced. Apparently the Panasonic FZ20 is starting to drop by $100 US. Probably due to another model about to be launched. Plus the competition of course. Now those types of cameras are great for macro and everyday use Shima. Plenty of macro ratio with a 6T on front, plenty of manual options and the shots are excellent with good optics. They have IS, which is great for macro.

So if those types of cameras are dropping in price, then they are well worth looking at. Would be an excellent birthday gift for any daughter

Anyway, just keep them coming, these are fun shots and well done.

Danny.

Shima · May 29, 2005

He has a newer and much nicer camera, this is his backup older camera.

The only thing with the E-10 is it's pretty heavy and clunky, not the most portable for random on the go times when I see shots, but eh.

I'm still not sure if I'm going to ask for a camera or if I'll just ask for leftover apartment things I need... though with the way things are looking in regards to the apartment stuff, I'm doing pretty well at this point, so I may end up asking for help getting a nicer camera.

So yeah, we shall see... if you hear of any great deals, feel free to point me in the right direction! Thanks

EDIT: just checked on dpreview--- the FZ20 is like the canon g6 in that it too is only slr-like but not true dslr.

My question is, comparing these two things- which would you choose?

FZ20:
Normal focus range 30 cm
Macro focus range 5 cm

Canon G6:
Normal focus range 50 cm
Macro focus range 5 cm /15 cm

??
thanks
~Cat

One more edit... Just found the Canon Pro1...
Normal focus range 50 cm
Macro focus range 3 / 10 cm

Oo.... (plus from what I hear with the recent firmware upgrade the Canon Pro1 is a bit better than the G6... interesting, must research this...)

nzmacro wrote:

Hmm, how about your dad donates the E-10 to a worthy cause in that case . The Oly E-10 is an excellent camera IMHO and maybe your dad needs a new camera anyway .

Lets see, if you don't want a full system Dslr kit and the expense of lenses to go with them, maybe you could look at something else. A Dslr could be an investment because the lenses become yours anyway. There are many capable cameras for macro out there. Most are fine with just a Nikon 6T on the front. You don't need the latest and greatest and maybe something that is about to be replaced. Apparently the Panasonic FZ20 is starting to drop by $100 US. Probably due to another model about to be launched. Plus the competition of course. Now those types of cameras are great for macro and everyday use Shima. Plenty of macro ratio with a 6T on front, plenty of manual options and the shots are excellent with good optics. They have IS, which is great for macro.

So if those types of cameras are dropping in price, then they are well worth looking at. Would be an excellent birthday gift for any daughter

Anyway, just keep them coming, these are fun shots and well done.

Danny.

nzmacro · May 30, 2005

Nothing wrong with any of those cameras Shima. Heres the problem with macro and the figures of how close you can get. You need to get CLOSE. Now if we throw on a simple +3 close up filter for example onto an FZ20, this is what you can get from around 10 - 12" (200mm - 300mm) from the subject.

http://www.nzmacro.50megs.com/ken/ken.html

Now that was done for a friend of mine, Ken, so just ignore the name OK

The larger the optical zoom with a +3, the larger the macro ratio. The last thing you want, is to get those ratios when you are nearly touching the subject. Thats the problem when we quote how close a camera will focus in macro mode. The idea is to focus with a larger ratio and from a further distance. That now gives us plenty of room for lighting and it also makes them feel more comfortable. So to achieve that, we throw on a +1, +3, etc.

The other advantage with the FZ20 is image stabilisation. That enables us to work without a tripod. Especially if we are after higher ratios than normal.

A good friend of mine Mark Plonsky used the Canon G series and he is pure magic in what he takes. Awesome macro shooter. Never did he shoot without something being on the front, a +3 or a reversed 50mm Slr lens (Thats a whole new ball game). Again the reason was to get a decent ratio with a decent lens to subject distance.

At the moment and this is just me, with whats on the market I would go for a Nikon 8800. The images are really clean, it has a great zoom range and has image stabilisation. If I was looking to save money, I would get the FZ20. Thats only IMO and what suits me though.

All the best Shima, hoping something comes your way

Danny.

Shima · May 30, 2005

So you do want a large optical zoom?
Does the smaller macro focus range also help though?
Because I notice if one is comparing the Pro1 to the Coolpix 8800 for exapmle... that they have the same minimum macro focus range... though you're looking at 7x optical zoom for the pro1 and a whopping 10x optical for the 8800... (ooo, aah, 10x)

I must say, I was looking at some of the sample shots for the 8800 and they're quite breathtaking on dpreview...

Should I be concerned that the 8800 only has TTL autofocus, whereas other camera's I looked at usually have TTL and one or two other modes of autofocus (ie flexizone or 9-point or 8-point) etc?

I'm not really savvy w/ lots of these technical details and such, so if you could help clarify what details are really important that would really help me out.

Macro would be my main goal, but I also do take pictures at social functions often, so I need my people in my pictures to look decent... and whenever I go somewhere breathtaking I enjoy taking landscape full scene pictures as well...

Thanks a lot for all the advice and patience with my questions!

I think the biggest deciding factor will probably also be whenever I'm able to find a store that actually has these in stock for me to hold and toy with a little... take a few pictures myself on each and compare those...

No stores nearby me seem to have them in stock though, I smell a trip to the city (nyc)....

nzmacro wrote:

Nothing wrong with any of those cameras Shima. Heres the problem with macro and the figures of how close you can get. You need to get CLOSE. Now if we throw on a simple +3 close up filter for example onto an FZ20, this is what you can get from around 10 - 12" (200mm - 300mm) from the subject.

http://www.nzmacro.50megs.com/ken/ken.html

Now that was done for a friend of mine, Ken, so just ignore the name OK

The larger the optical zoom with a +3, the larger the macro ratio. The last thing you want, is to get those ratios when you are nearly touching the subject. Thats the problem when we quote how close a camera will focus in macro mode. The idea is to focus with a larger ratio and from a further distance. That now gives us plenty of room for lighting and it also makes them feel more comfortable. So to achieve that, we throw on a +1, +3, etc.

The other advantage with the FZ20 is image stabilisation. That enables us to work without a tripod. Especially if we are after higher ratios than normal.

A good friend of mine Mark Plonsky used the Canon G series and he is pure magic in what he takes. Awesome macro shooter. Never did he shoot without something being on the front, a +3 or a reversed 50mm Slr lens (Thats a whole new ball game). Again the reason was to get a decent ratio with a decent lens to subject distance.

At the moment and this is just me, with whats on the market I would go for a Nikon 8800. The images are really clean, it has a great zoom range and has image stabilisation. If I was looking to save money, I would get the FZ20. Thats only IMO and what suits me though.

All the best Shima, hoping something comes your way

Danny.

nzmacro · May 30, 2005

Most definitely Shima, how a camera feels and functions in the hands is very important. Never get a camera on a say so from anyone IMHO. It is all very subjective for sure.

With the cameras closest setting in macro mode and you don't plan on adding anything in front of the lens, then those closest figures you quote there mean something. Now when you are in that macro mode on the camera, you are fixed to a certain macro ratio. Generally you can't use the zoom to make it larger. Thats what the macro mode does basically, it traps you into only a limited range.

When we attach a close up filter or anything else to the front of the lens for macro, we can now switch it off the "macro mode" and use the full use of the optical zoom of the camera lens. That now enables use to zoom to a much larger macro ratio or size. It also allows for a lot more lens to subject distance.

So if you are never going to add anything for macro and are happy being VERY close to the subject, then those distances there, means how close you can get to the subject and the less distance, the larger the subject will be.

The idea with macro is to have a comfortable distance to work with. Being REAL close to the subject is not really what we are after. So we add a close up filter to the front.

With the close up filter on the front is now where a larger optical zoom on the camera comes into play. The larger the zoom range on the camera, the larger the macro ratio or size of the subject we can capture.

It depends on what macro ratio's you want to get. I like very large ratios while others find it too large. Some like to fill the frame with the entire subject, while I like to see certain parts and things my eyes can't see by themselves.

I never worry about what the figure is for a camera when they quote the closest you can get, because I already know what I plan to do and it wont be in macro mode.

With the different flash modes, one might be better for you than others. TTL is the way to go if the camera has it. That now makes exposure easier for sure Shima. If down the track, you want to add external flash units, it certainly helps, whether its in auto mode or not.

Flash gets interesting, so lets go back to those closest focusing distances again for a minute. If you are too close to the subject, the inbuilt flash becomes 100% useless. You need more lens to subject distance once again. When we add a closeup filter of around a +2 - +4, we are now much further back from the subject, the inbuilt flash now works because of that extra distance. Very handy to use. Also don't forget, because of what we are using eg: large optical zoom and added closeup filter, the macro ratio is also larger than being right in front of the subject.

All the best Shima, remember, spelling and grammar ain't my good points.

Danny.

Shima · May 30, 2005

I'm reading through your last post currently... just wanted to say real quick before I respond to that: my dad took the trouble of deciding on a camera out of my hands, today he went down and picked up the Canon Powershot Pro1 for me (at B&H in NYC)... my birthday's not until August 4th, but I'll be away at a Japanese language program all summer & during that, so he decided to surprise me before I went away!

Ok, back to reading the rest of your post now so I can respond to that.

Shima · May 30, 2005

Just finished reading all of this, sounds like I will definitly want a close up filter for this new camera then seeing as how hard it can be to get close to some bugs, and some I just don't want to get close to! (yellowjackets and more specifically spiders! eep!). So I guess my new question for you would be, once I get used to this Pro1 and such, what close up filters would work with it / which ones would you recommend?

I'm still slightly in shock that my dad just out and bought me a new camera today, lol.

Now if only this darned battery would finish charging... that could be another hour or two

pity the sun is just about done setting, will have to wait til tomorrow for some really cool outdoor macro testing...

nzmacro wrote:

Most definitely Shima, how a camera feels and functions in the hands is very important. Never get a camera on a say so from anyone IMHO. It is all very subjective for sure.

With the cameras closest setting in macro mode and you don't plan on adding anything in front of the lens, then those closest figures you quote there mean something. Now when you are in that macro mode on the camera, you are fixed to a certain macro ratio. Generally you can't use the zoom to make it larger. Thats what the macro mode does basically, it traps you into only a limited range.

When we attach a close up filter or anything else to the front of the lens for macro, we can now switch it off the "macro mode" and use the full use of the optical zoom of the camera lens. That now enables use to zoom to a much larger macro ratio or size. It also allows for a lot more lens to subject distance.

So if you are never going to add anything for macro and are happy being VERY close to the subject, then those distances there, means how close you can get to the subject and the less distance, the larger the subject will be.

The idea with macro is to have a comfortable distance to work with. Being REAL close to the subject is not really what we are after. So we add a close up filter to the front.

With the close up filter on the front is now where a larger optical zoom on the camera comes into play. The larger the zoom range on the camera, the larger the macro ratio or size of the subject we can capture.

It depends on what macro ratio's you want to get. I like very large ratios while others find it too large. Some like to fill the frame with the entire subject, while I like to see certain parts and things my eyes can't see by themselves.

I never worry about what the figure is for a camera when they quote the closest you can get, because I already know what I plan to do and it wont be in macro mode.

With the different flash modes, one might be better for you than others. TTL is the way to go if the camera has it. That now makes exposure easier for sure Shima. If down the track, you want to add external flash units, it certainly helps, whether its in auto mode or not.

Flash gets interesting, so lets go back to those closest focusing distances again for a minute. If you are too close to the subject, the inbuilt flash becomes 100% useless. You need more lens to subject distance once again. When we add a closeup filter of around a +2 - +4, we are now much further back from the subject, the inbuilt flash now works because of that extra distance. Very handy to use. Also don't forget, because of what we are using eg: large optical zoom and added closeup filter, the macro ratio is also larger than being right in front of the subject.

All the best Shima, remember, spelling and grammar ain't my good points.

Danny.

nzmacro · May 31, 2005

Your dad is something else, this is the best news I've seen today

A canon 250D or a Nikon 6T are excellent. Not sure on the size of the thread you need so we will go with those first. I'll go and check later. Those two are what we term as achromatic. In other words they are twin element and far better corrected than a simple single element close up filter/supplementary lenses. The extra element is to help avoid chromatic abberations and bring the colours together at the same point. That way they tend to get rid of the purple fringing we see so much about, which is really a colour shift.

I better go check out the specs on the pro1 for the correct thread size and terms.

Danny.

Shima · May 31, 2005

Looking forward to more of your great macro advice...
Until then, my only macro outdoor shot for the night is this:

Must wait for the sun to rise to really get some good shots tomorrow, it was too dark tonight by the time my dad gave me this.

nzmacro wrote:

Your dad is something else, this is the best news I've seen today

A canon 250D or a Nikon 6T are excellent. Not sure on the size of the thread you need so we will go with those first. I'll go and check later. Those two are what we term as achromatic. In other words they are twin element and far better corrected than a simple single element close up filter/supplementary lenses. The extra element is to help avoid chromatic abberations and bring the colours together at the same point. That way they tend to get rid of the purple fringing we see so much about, which is really a colour shift.

I better go check out the specs on the pro1 for the correct thread size and terms.

Danny.

nzmacro · May 31, 2005

Hey nice shot. Wonderful colours Shima.

Ok, just checked out the Pro1. Now I'm not sure if it comes with the bayonet hood for the lens to take filters or not ???. If it does then the best option is either a Nikon 4T or the 6T. Both the same 2.9 dioptre. Just different thread sizes. So check them out

The Nikon 6T

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=37298&is=REG

And the Nikon 4T

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=37296&is=REG

Both are the same twin element achromatic supplementary lenses.

So what we need to know now, is did the Pro1 come with that bayonet hood and if it did, what is the thread size it will take on front ???

All the best Shima, just checked out your dads shot, neat guy man, neat guy.

Danny.

Shima · May 31, 2005

I have a filter adapter- is this what you were referring to?

Reading the back of the paper that came with this, and it tells about the optional Conversion Lens Adapter which is used for fitting the tele-converter, close up lens, macro ring lite, and macro twin lite to the camera---- so is that what I really need?

What is this filter adapter for? (and how on earth does it go on? I can't figure that out / or find it in the manual just yet, still looking)

Did find on the canon site that you can get a 58mm Close-up Lens 500D which is compatible with the Pro1... though when I read the description on the back of my paper it says that you use this *while* in macro mode... so that confuses me more...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=87494&is=REG

So the question is, what adapter is needed for this, and then I'm still not sure of the thread size... ::Scratches head:: Is the 58mm the thread size you're referring to? That canon lens says nothing about the dioptre though.

So much to learn with this new camera...

nzmacro wrote:

Hey nice shot. Wonderful colours Shima.

Ok, just checked out the Pro1. Now I'm not sure if it comes with the bayonet hood for the lens to take filters or not ???. If it does then the best option is either a Nikon 4T or the 6T. Both the same 2.9 dioptre. Just different thread sizes. So check them out

The Nikon 6T

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=37298&is=REG

And the Nikon 4T

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=37296&is=REG

Both are the same twin element achromatic supplementary lenses.

So what we need to know now, is did the Pro1 come with that bayonet hood and if it did, what is the thread size it will take on front ???

All the best Shima, just checked out your dads shot, neat guy man, neat guy.

Danny.

nzmacro · May 31, 2005

Ignore what it says about being in macro mode. The Canon 250D and the 500D are excellent Shima. Skippy here used a Canon 250D on her Sony 828 with excellent results. We go back a long way. I'll see if I can get her in here to this thread.

The Canon 500D is less powerful than the 250D. So the 58mm 250D is what you are after. Its more expensive than the Nikon equivalent but will probably fit better on the Pro1 and you don't need a step down ring. $86.00 but it will work well and last forever. Brilliant for macro work. Don't worry about it saying you need to use it in macro mode ok, you don't need to.

The hood or filter adaptor looks similar the the Canon FD mount lenses on the front. The bayonet twists onto the ridges at the front of the lens. Try that Shima.

All the best and lets see if Skippy can give advice. She know her macro work with the 250D

Danny.

nzmacro · May 31, 2005

Ah ha, check it out

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonpro1/page4.asp

Danny.

Skippy · May 31, 2005

Hi There Shima

Shima wrote:

I have a filter adapter- is this what you were referring to?

Reading the back of the paper that came with this, and it tells about the optional Conversion Lens Adapter which is used for fitting the tele-converter, close up lens, macro ring lite, and macro twin lite to the camera---- so is that what I really need?

What is this filter adapter for? (and how on earth does it go on? I can't figure that out / or find it in the manual just yet, still looking)

Did find on the canon site that you can get a 58mm Close-up Lens 500D which is compatible with the Pro1... though when I read the description on the back of my paper it says that you use this *while* in macro mode... so that confuses me more...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=87494&is=REG

So the question is, what adapter is needed for this, and then I'm still not sure of the thread size... ::Scratches head:: Is the 58mm the thread size you're referring to? That canon lens says nothing about the dioptre though.

So much to learn with this new camera...

The Canon 250D is equiv to a 4+ Diop. and works beautifully on the Sony's, what it does is allow you to get further away from the subject allowing more light between the camera and the Bug/flower or whatever your photographing........one of the biggest problems with doing Macro is the lack of light....I was one of those people who prefered to use Natural Light, till I discovered is you get a decent Flash that is compatible with your camera

The Canon 250D has a 58mm thread and it also comes in other sizes.
The 500D is only a 2.8 I think, the 250D is one sweet piece of glass

Go to the store and try them both out if your unsure, you will clearly see the difference ....... Hopefully someone else will jump in and fill you in better than I can, I don't understand the technical side of Photography at all

sorry but I'm not that clever, a lot of it goes right over my head.

Here's a couple done with the Canon 250D on a Sony F828 with ext Flash.

Hope you find the answers your looking for ....... Skippy (Australia)

Shima · May 31, 2005

Ahh... makes sense now... though it does specify that I still need the Canon LADC58C Lens Adapter if I'm going to want to put the close up lens on it... the filter adapater is just for filters / the hood.

In other news- I called the camera store in town, and he does have these items... but he was telling me that it's not really what I want for macro? He's confusing me... he was saying that he thinks I might need telephoto.... He was like "you're supposed to be on top of it for macro"...

er... yeah, he's like contradicting you guys, and personally I'm more inclined to believe you guys that I would want this, since macro is something you both do a lot...

any ideas of what I should say to him when I go in so he doesn't talk me in circles?

EDIT: noticed something on amazon: The 250D is optimized for lenses between 50-135mm, while the 500D works best with telephoto lense from 70-300mm. Thoughts?

nzmacro wrote:

Ah ha, check it out

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonpro1/page4.asp

Danny.

dragon300zx · May 31, 2005

Shima wrote:

any ideas of what I should say to him when I go in so he doesn't talk me in circles?

"While I respect your opinions (whether you actually do or not) the photographers I converse with normally know my style of shooting and think what I am asking for is what would best suite me. And as I have seen the results it has gotten for them I think this is what I want to try first. So whats it gonna run me, I'd hate to have to wait for it to arrive from B&H."

Shima · May 31, 2005

Thanks, the camera store I'm going down to later has been in his family for eons, his dad used to own it, and now he owns it... I live in a small town, so it brings upon the "I know what I'm talking about and you don't" type of attitude, and considering that he knows I'm not expert or anywhere near it I think that's how he felt justified treating me like I didn't know what I was talking about on the phone...
...I'll probably go down and talk to him after lunch...

Although I can't say the B&H reason, if I want B&H I'll just hop on the train (or drive, but I hate finding parking in NYC) and be in the city an hour and a half later and go to B&H in person, lol. Us Long Islander's don't normally get B&H things shipped to our homes, heh. Though if I'm going to do that, I'll wait til the weekend for my dad to show me where B&H is since he goes there a lot, I've never actually been in their store yet... but I figured I should first get a look at the lens, and could do that by going down to the camera store in town since he has what I'm looking for in stock.

But yeah, thanks for the wording, I particularly like:

dragon300zx wrote:

"the photographers I converse with normally know my style of shooting and think what I am asking for is what would best suite me. And as I have seen the results it has gotten for them I think this is what I want to try first."

dragon300zx · May 31, 2005

Oh to live so close to B&H. If only I was that lucky. But then again I'd have even less money.

Macro on Rope

Comments