A Real Tall Order

canon400d · October 4, 2007

I think as the majority of people know I am very new on here and from the number of clangers I have made I am so determined to succeed. I feel more and more confident every day and I know I have jumped the gun and got a 40D from the 400d. However, I feel more confident with the 400D having used the 40D but let us make no mistake there is one hell of a difference. As all you pro guys know. Yes, I love using the 40D every day.
As you can see from my profile the number of lenses I have and today I have just bought the extension tubes from Jessops for my 60mm Macro lens.
I know you professionals will all say I have too many lenses. However, as a learner I feel that every lens I do have does play its part in its own respect.
Now I will get to the real question. My mother in law is visiting the States at Xmas and she wants to bring me back a good lens. I was thinking of the 24-105F2.8 IS lens to add to my collection. But should I go for something else bearing in mind what I have. I would like to know from the real Pro's from whom I have placed all my trust in since I went into photography and I would like to give you all a BIG thankyou for all your kind help.

Chrissiebeez_NL · October 4, 2007

i'm no pro but if you could get a 24-105 F2.8L IS then i would recommend you buy it and sell it as a rarity

just kidding.. i think you mean the 24-105 F4L IS.. and since pro lenses are not my turf i'll leave it to that

good luck!

wxwax · October 4, 2007

You're covered from 17mm to 500mm.

You don't need another lens.

canon400d · October 4, 2007

Chrissiebeez_NL wrote:

i'm no pro but if you could get a 24-105 F2.8L IS then i would recommend you buy it and sell it as a rarity just kidding.. i think you mean the 24-105 F4L IS.. and since pro lenses are not my turf i'll leave it to that

good luck!

I sincerely apologise about that. You are right it is the F.4 and not the 2.8

Cheers
Bob

HarveyMushman · October 4, 2007

wxwax wrote:

You're covered from 17mm to 500mm.

You don't need another lens.

A comma or two on the other hand . . .

wxwax · October 4, 2007

HarveyMushman wrote:

A comma or two on the other hand . . .

Paragraphs are your friend.

canon400d · October 4, 2007

wxwax wrote:

You're covered from 17mm to 500mm.

You don't need another lens.

Mmmm so do I not need another lens. I was of the opinion that the 24-105 lens is much better than what I have in my collection. Is that not right? I hope I get well advised on this before I order this lens. I am interestd in the Macro photography so should I go for something else. I do have a Canon 60mm Macro lens with the extension tubes but I am having problems at the moment as I have posted on the Hoy Macro Site.

canon400d · October 4, 2007

HarveyMushman wrote:

A comma or two on the other hand . . .

Hi Harvey
So you are saying I should not bother. Well this is my opportunity to get the lens that everyone is talking about. Or am I wrong? What is there in my collection to match the Canon 24-105 F/4 IS I appreciate your comments.
Kind Regards
Bob

cmason · October 4, 2007

well in the 50-70 range, you are pretty well covered

Yes the 24-105 f4 L is a wonderful lens, I wish I had one! But, why are you buying it? Because you can or you just heard it was good? Seriously, I think you need to study your needs a bit.

What subjects do you enjoy photographing? Landscapes? Portraits? Nature? Sports? Travel?

In what situations do you normally shoot? low light, indoors, outdoors, bad weather, bright light?

These are important and should be part of the equation. Look at your photos...what focal length do they tend to be..wide or telephoto? What shutterspeeds and ISOs: slow speeds and high ISO, or low ISO , Highspeed?

As an example here, if you find you are shooting in the 25-70 range, low light, high ISO and mosty landscape and portraits, maybe travel..I would recommend the 24-70 2.8 or the Tamron 28-75 for their 2.8 apetures, something you do not have in your collection now. (well aside from the 50)

If you want a versatile,l around lens because you want to eliminate the bulk of your lens collection (like say the 17-85 and the 18-55) then the 24-105 is ideal.

So, look at your needs, then pick the best lens for your situation.

sirsloop · October 4, 2007

canon400d wrote:

I sincerely apologise about that. You are right it is the F.4 and not the 2.8

Cheers
Bob

cripes... f.4?? I need one of THOSE

Chrissiebeez_NL · October 5, 2007

sirsloop wrote:

cripes... f.4?? I need one of THOSE

haha stop teasing him!!

claudermilk · October 5, 2007

Sheesh! Didn't I just tell you to quit with the gear acquisition syndrome?!

:smack:D

Seriously, you are pretty darn well covered in lenses. If you really, really want the 24-105 (or 24-70 ir you feel you need the f2.8 speed), then I'd suggeste selling off the 18-55 and 17-85 as you would have three redundant lenses. The only other I can think of you might be interested in is the Canon 10-22 or Tokina 12-24 for getting really wide. However, stop an analyze what it is that you are shooting/want to shoot and then determine what lenses you need to accomplish that. Chances are you will find no holes.

Oh, and AFAIK extension tubes on the 60mm macro are redundant. The extension tubes are for something like, say your 70-200 to allow the close focus distances needed to use it for macros. The 60mm macro can already do that on it's own--that's what it's built for.

Really at this point, my best advice is to stop buying more gear--epsecially based on the "oh, you need to get this and that" comments you see (particularly store clerks with ulterior motives--commissions). Practice with your already-extensive kit and get proficient with it. You will over time come to learn on your own what is missing from your bag. Even with all the teasing we're giving you, your enthusiam is great to see.

wxwax · October 5, 2007

canon400d wrote:

Mmmm so do I not need another lens. I was of the opinion that the 24-105 lens is much better than what I have in my collection. Is that not right? I hope I get well advised on this before I order this lens. I am interestd in the Macro photography so should I go for something else. I do have a Canon 60mm Macro lens with the extension tubes but I am having problems at the moment as I have posted on the Hoy Macro Site.

I would suggest that's it's time to start using the lenses you have.

Learn your camera, learn your glass. If, after a couple of years of doing that, you decide your glass is inadequate, by all means replace it.

But you have all you need. Time to start using it.

sirsloop · October 5, 2007

I say go for it... then again i've got the same problem

canon400d · October 5, 2007

sirsloop wrote:

I say go for it... then again i've got the same problem

The thing is I am retired and I spend a lot of time photographing almost everything. Wildlife, landscapes, close ups, outdoors, indoors I could go on and on. I have the 400D which I have in one case with some of the lenses and the 40D in another case with the rest of the lenses and gear. I do feel I have a use for the lenses I have because I keep changing them for the different things I photograph.
I accept all the criticism which has been directed at me but I can stand that its you guys who are the pros not me. It is one way the experienced get satisfaction from people like me. It is sound advice I want so I can build up my confidence.
Kind Regards
Bob

sirsloop · October 5, 2007

canon400d wrote:

The thing is I am retired and I spend a lot of time photographing almost everything. Wildlife, landscapes, close ups, outdoors, indoors I could go on and on. I have the 400D which I have in one case with some of the lenses and the 40D in another case with the rest of the lenses and gear. I do feel I have a use for the lenses I have because I keep changing them for the different things I photograph.
I accept all the criticism which has been directed at me but I can stand that its you guys who are the pros not me. It is one way the experienced get satisfaction from people like me. It is sound advice I want so I can build up my confidence.
Kind Regards
Bob

OK, so my first comment was a little childish and sarcastic. Just trying to lighten the mood. My second comment was sincere. If you have the cash and want a lens why not? I know what its like having like 5 lenses that are 70-200's and 70-300's. You're sitting there with two bodies and five lenses that are virtually the same thing!

Lol... look in the photo, 75-300, 70-300IS, 70-200/4L, 70-200/2.8L, 70-200/2.8LIS... all in the back row to the middle/left. Its freakin great!! HAHAH! I used to use the 75-300 as a paperweight, literally!

canon400d · October 5, 2007

claudermilk wrote:

Sheesh! Didn't I just tell you to quit with the gear acquisition syndrome?! :smack:D

Seriously, you are pretty darn well covered in lenses. If you really, really want the 24-105 (or 24-70 ir you feel you need the f2.8 speed), then I'd suggeste selling off the 18-55 and 17-85 as you would have three redundant lenses. The only other I can think of you might be interested in is the Canon 10-22 or Tokina 12-24 for getting really wide. However, stop an analyze what it is that you are shooting/want to shoot and then determine what lenses you need to accomplish that. Chances are you will find no holes.

Oh, and AFAIK extension tubes on the 60mm macro are redundant. The extension tubes are for something like, say your 70-200 to allow the close focus distances needed to use it for macros. The 60mm macro can already do that on it's own--that's what it's built for.

Really at this point, my best advice is to stop buying more gear--epsecially based on the "oh, you need to get this and that" comments you see (particularly store clerks with ulterior motives--commissions). Practice with your already-extensive kit and get proficient with it. You will over time come to learn on your own what is missing from your bag. Even with all the teasing we're giving you, your enthusiam is great to see.

I was getting this 24-105 bought for me as a present. I am retired and I spend a lot of my time weather permitting taking photos of almost everything. From landscapes to close ups. Indoors and outdoors, etc etc etc. I have my 400D in a bag with some of the lenses and the 40D in another bag with the rest of the lenses and I am using them all for various things. I find it more convenient this way rather than hauling around everything together.
Are you saying I do not need extension tubes for my 60mm Macro 2.8? Because I was told I needed them when I went into the Macro forum and I have been given advice on how to take macro shots using various camera settings etc.
Thanks once again for all your sound advice.
Bob

sirsloop · October 5, 2007

canon400d wrote:

I was getting this 24-105 bought for me as a present. I am retired and I spend a lot of my time weather permitting taking photos of almost everything. From landscapes to close ups. Indoors and outdoors, etc etc etc. I have my 400D in a bag with some of the lenses and the 40D in another bag with the rest of the lenses and I am using them all for various things. I find it more convenient this way rather than hauling around everything together.
Are you saying I do not need extension tubes for my 60mm Macro 2.8? Because I was told I needed them when I went into the Macro forum and I have been given advice on how to take macro shots using various camera settings etc.
Thanks once again for all your sound advice.
Bob

You don't have to explain yourself ever time you make a lens purchase! HAHAH!!

Cash + desire = toys (note I didnt say need).

The 24-105 is a real nice walk around lens, period. You'll LOVE it. Extension tubes for a macro lens are good... you'll love them too.

Do you need this stuff? No! If you have the cash and you want to play then thats 100% your business. I can't speak for everyone here, but I don't judge people based on big their signature and gear list is. I respect people that follow their dreams.

LiquidAir · October 5, 2007

I have a 24-105 and I love it for my 5D but I am not sure I would get one for a 40D because, at least for my needs, it isn't wide enough to be my walkabout lens on a 1.6 crop sensor. Realistically, if I had a 40D, a 17-55/2.8 IS would be on the camera 80% of the time. Given that, I would ask myself what else goes in my camera bag? For me, the answer would be a 10-22 and either a 70-200 or a 70-300 depending on how much I wanted to carry. Add to that the 60mm macro and you have pretty much everything short of professional sports and wildlife covered.

canon400d · October 6, 2007

sirsloop wrote:

You don't have to explain yourself ever time you make a lens purchase! HAHAH!!

Cash + desire = toys (note I didnt say need).

The 24-105 is a real nice walk around lens, period. You'll LOVE it. Extension tubes for a macro lens are good... you'll love them too.

Do you need this stuff? No! If you have the cash and you want to play then thats 100% your business. I can't speak for everyone here, but I don't judge people based on big their signature and gear list is. I respect people that follow their dreams.

Thanks once again for your sound advice. I have always been of the opinion that if you have the right gear and the right knowledge the job or task in hand becomes so much easier. I found this in my employment as a high ranking detective officer. Its like digging over a graden if your spade is clean and shiny the soil doesn't stick to the spade. If not you have problems. I am sure the same applies to photography. I am wanting advice on what to have and use I don't require any advice as to what I have to spend. I really appreciate everything you have said but criticism can go in two directions if the facts stated are not correct.
Kind Regards
Bob

canon400d · October 6, 2007

LiquidAir wrote:

I have a 24-105 and I love it for my 5D but I am not sure I would get one for a 40D because, at least for my needs, it isn't wide enough to be my walkabout lens on a 1.6 crop sensor. Realistically, if I had a 40D, a 17-55/2.8 IS would be on the camera 80% of the time. Given that, I would ask myself what else goes in my camera bag? For me, the answer would be a 10-22 and either a 70-200 or a 70-300 depending on how much I wanted to carry. Add to that the 60mm macro and you have pretty much everything short of professional sports and wildlife covered.

Thanks ever so much for the advice you have given me. I will look at the 10-22 reviews. I have the Canon 70-200L F/4 and the Sigma 70-300
Cheers
Bob

claudermilk · October 6, 2007

No criticism at all from me--at least none of my posts have been intendedthat way. Just some advice. Hnestly, I have the same "problem"--I want to shoot all kinds of subjects from macros to grand vista landscapes and everything in between. My point has been that IMHO, I think you'll get more out of your gear if you concentrate on really learning to use what you already have before expanding the kit more. There is such a thing as too many choices. With a dozen lenses in your bag all at once, you'll spend more time bouncing from one to another & not really learning to get the best out of each one.

Using my own experience as an example again, I stuck to the 20D and 50/1.8 for nearly a year. With having to deal with just that for my options, I have really learned the ins & outs of the body (I can set it any way I want, even in complete darkness), and have a good feel for the lens. I then added a 24-70 and stuck with the body & those two lenses, so I have a pretty good idea when I will need the 24-70. And so on. At this point I can preview an outing and select the specific lenses I will need, and only take those along (still over pack a bit, but I'm getting much better now). I am right at square one with my "new" Mamiya 645Pro--I only have the 80mm lens (same as a 50mm lens on 35mm SLRs), I won't be getting another lens for abit because I want ot really learn to use what I have first.

Now, once you've acuired that kind of familiarity with your gear, you will already know what the limitations are, when you need to buy another piece of kit, and what that piece might be.

For the 60mm macro, AFAIK, no the extension tubes are not needed.

One final comment, if you're looking at the 10-22, compare it to the Tokina 12-24. I prefer the latter lens myself.

canon400d · October 6, 2007

claudermilk wrote:

No criticism at all from me--at least none of my posts have been intendedthat way. Just some advice. Hnestly, I have the same "problem"--I want to shoot all kinds of subjects from macros to grand vista landscapes and everything in between. My point has been that IMHO, I think you'll get more out of your gear if you concentrate on really learning to use what you already have before expanding the kit more. There is such a thing as too many choices. With a dozen lenses in your bag all at once, you'll spend more time bouncing from one to another & not really learning to get the best out of each one.

Using my own experience as an example again, I stuck to the 20D and 50/1.8 for nearly a year. With having to deal with just that for my options, I have really learned the ins & outs of the body (I can set it any way I want, even in complete darkness), and have a good feel for the lens. I then added a 24-70 and stuck with the body & those two lenses, so I have a pretty good idea when I will need the 24-70. And so on. At this point I can preview an outing and select the specific lenses I will need, and only take those along (still over pack a bit, but I'm getting much better now). I am right at square one with my "new" Mamiya 645Pro--I only have the 80mm lens (same as a 50mm lens on 35mm SLRs), I won't be getting another lens for abit because I want ot really learn to use what I have first.

Now, once you've acuired that kind of familiarity with your gear, you will already know what the limitations are, when you need to buy another piece of kit, and what that piece might be.

For the 60mm macro, AFAIK, no the extension tubes are not needed.

One final comment, if you're looking at the 10-22, compare it to the Tokina 12-24. I prefer the latter lens myself.

Thanks ever so much Chris I didn't point a finger at anyone intentionally but certain members were told that the jokes had gone far enough. I am not complaining as I wouldn't be where I am today if it wasn't for the kind help you have all given me for which I truly appreciate. As for the remark in one reply about commas etc. I went to university and got a degree. I bet that person didn't achieve the same.
Anyhow, I totally agree with what you are saying about getting to know what you have and you are quite right about jumping from one lens to another. Your advice is sound and always has been.
I am a wee bit lost as to what you say about the 60mm macro and the extension tubes. I would like you to visit the Holy Macro forum, and you will see I put a thread on about colour in Macro and as a result I have carried out the tests today. The extension tubes are essential with the 60mm macro and I went on to try the 13mm & 21mm tube on the Canon 50mm prime lens and as you will see not a lot of difference, but again practice is needed. I have copied the following which I posted to Brian for his comments:
Hi Brian,
I have completed the two exercises and wow what a difference with the manual setting. I will have to practice the sway but the broom handle is a wonderful tip. I have the following pics to show you and your comments would be most appreciated.

http://canon400d.smugmug.com/photos/204591119-L.jpg
Taken at 1/200 F11 ISO 200 with 13mm tube
http://canon400d.smugmug.com/photos/204591125-L.jpg
Taken with same settings with two tubes 13 and 21mm
http://canon400d.smugmug.com/photos/204591128-L.jpg
Taken with same settings with three tubes 13, 21 and 31mm
http://canon400d.smugmug.com/photos/204591134-L.jpg
Taken without touching table
http://canon400d.smugmug.com/photos/204591137-L.jpg
Taken with elbows on table
http://canon400d.smugmug.com/photos/204591123-L.jpg
Taken with broom handle
http://canon400d.smugmug.com/photos/204603794-L.jpg
This is the Magical Angle shot F8
All the shots were taken with my 40D and with the external 580 flash.
Thanks once again for all your kind help I will go and practice again.
Bob
I will certainly look at the lens which you have recommended the Tokina 12-24. I look forward to hearing from you Chris and once again thanks a lot as I reiterate if it wasn't for you guys I would never get there.
Kind Regards
Bob

canon400d · October 7, 2007

claudermilk wrote:

No criticism at all from me--at least none of my posts have been intendedthat way. Just some advice. Hnestly, I have the same "problem"--I want to shoot all kinds of subjects from macros to grand vista landscapes and everything in between. My point has been that IMHO, I think you'll get more out of your gear if you concentrate on really learning to use what you already have before expanding the kit more. There is such a thing as too many choices. With a dozen lenses in your bag all at once, you'll spend more time bouncing from one to another & not really learning to get the best out of each one.

Using my own experience as an example again, I stuck to the 20D and 50/1.8 for nearly a year. With having to deal with just that for my options, I have really learned the ins & outs of the body (I can set it any way I want, even in complete darkness), and have a good feel for the lens. I then added a 24-70 and stuck with the body & those two lenses, so I have a pretty good idea when I will need the 24-70. And so on. At this point I can preview an outing and select the specific lenses I will need, and only take those along (still over pack a bit, but I'm getting much better now). I am right at square one with my "new" Mamiya 645Pro--I only have the 80mm lens (same as a 50mm lens on 35mm SLRs), I won't be getting another lens for abit because I want ot really learn to use what I have first.

Now, once you've acuired that kind of familiarity with your gear, you will already know what the limitations are, when you need to buy another piece of kit, and what that piece might be.

For the 60mm macro, AFAIK, no the extension tubes are not needed.

One final comment, if you're looking at the 10-22, compare it to the Tokina 12-24. I prefer the latter lens myself.

I have looked at the reviews on the Tokina 12-24 F4 and there is no doubt it is one fine sturdy lens. It is apparently quite prone to flare and ghosting. However, the weather we have in Scotland I don't think that will be a big problem. Here is a photo from that lens to let you see what it can do.
[IMG]mhtml:file://C:\Documents and Settings\bob\My Documents\Night Photography in Sussex.mht!http://www.nightfolio.co.uk/art/big-tree.jpg[/IMG]

HarveyMushman · October 8, 2007

canon400d wrote:

As for the remark in one reply about commas etc. I went to university and got a degree. I bet that person didn't achieve the same.

By the way, I was commenting on your (extensive . . . ) lens list in your profile, not your posts here.

You say you like receiving everyone's advice, but you haven't responded to the most important advice offered here, which is: Go photograph things. Practice. Learn.

No lens, no matter how good, is going to take a decent photograph for you. You talk about your experience with extension tubes and lack of success. I saw your photos in the in the Macro forum. I suggest you'd be more happy with them if you would invest more effort in learning the proper macro techniques, rather than worrying about your (perfectly adequate) equipment. I say this modestly, as macro photography is a specialty about which I know little. The "pros" there have much to offer the both of us, in terms of learning the correct techniques.

Just go use the (plentiful) stuff you have. Practice. Ask questions about technique. You'll get more help from the "pros" and you'll eventually discover what your actual lens needs are. If they include the 24-105 by all means get it.

claudermilk · October 8, 2007

On the macro, that's why I put in my escape clause: "AFAIK."

At this point you are ahead of me in experience--I have yet to even throw a tube on my current lenses. My understanding (which was apparently incorrect) was that the tubes were meant to allow normal lenses (e.g., the 24-70) to be used as macro, while macro lenses were already set up for close focus. Looks like you still get good use from them regardless of the lenses--and boy are those shots graphic examples of the ultra-narrow DOF you are dealing with!

I have not seen the flare/ghosting problems other people have with my 12-24. I've even taken shots with the sun in-frame, and gotten virtually nothing. For example, the following shot was at 12mm, the sun is in-frame near the cables where it gets light. You can see the little streak by some rivets--that's all the flare I got. Not bad if you ask me. This is typical of my experience with the lens. So, I disagree with the general assessment that it's prone to flare (or maybe it's due to my apparent magic touch with lenses

).

canon400d · October 8, 2007

HarveyMushman wrote:

By the way, I was commenting on your (extensive . . . ) lens list in your profile, not your posts here.

You say you like receiving everyone's advice, but you haven't responded to the most important advice offered here, which is: Go photograph things. Practice. Learn.

No lens, no matter how good, is going to take a decent photograph for you. You talk about your experience with extension tubes and lack of success. I saw your photos in the in the Macro forum. I suggest you'd be more happy with them if you would invest more effort in learning the proper macro techniques, rather than worrying about your (perfectly adequate) equipment. I say this modestly, as macro photography is a specialty about which I know little. The "pros" there have much to offer the both of us, in terms of learning the correct techniques.

Just go use the (plentiful) stuff you have. Practice. Ask questions about technique. You'll get more help from the "pros" and you'll eventually discover what your actual lens needs are. If they include the 24-105 by all means get it.

Hi Harvey,
(Moderator edit)

As far as responding to advice offered I can only reiterate what I have previously said on this matter and I certainly appreciate all the advice I have been given. I have continued from day one to take as many photos as possible with the variety of lenses I have acquired. From my short experience I have found no two lenses are the same, even though my lenses do overlap from 17 to 500mm. Each lens, I think has a responsibility to play taking into consideration all the circumstances.
As for macrophotography I find it so interesting and with the personal help I have had from Lord Vetinari, Brian, from the Holy Macro Forum I would not have achieved what I have done without his help for which I am truly thankful. He is a valuable member and a credit to Dgrin. I trust before you make a remark about the shots I have taken I suggest you take a look at the ones I have posted on this thread. This is the reply I received from Lord Vetinari:
Originally Posted by Lord Vetinari
Screw shots look good to me. As you suggest once you have found some reasonable camera settings it is then down to practice. Tubes seem to be working well on both lenses .

Brian V.
So you admitting you have no experience on macrophotography I trust in future you will consider your thoughts before making a reply you do not no what you are talking about. That is my advice to you, Harvey.
I also appreciate what you have said in your last reply about the 24-105 lens. I have been advised on Dgrin to look at the Tokina 12-24 F4. I have looked at this lens and I am certainly having one and in fact I have one on order. I have put the 24-105 on the back burner at the moment until my mother in law visits the States at Xmas and she wants to treat me to a lens and the Canon 24-105 F4L IS is the one she wants to treat me to.
Now I have defended myself to the strong remarks you have made I feel much happier.
Kind Regards
Bob

canon400d · October 8, 2007

claudermilk wrote:

On the macro, that's why I put in my escape clause: "AFAIK." At this point you are ahead of me in experience--I have yet to even throw a tube on my current lenses. My understanding (which was apparently incorrect) was that the tubes were meant to allow normal lenses (e.g., the 24-70) to be used as macro, while macro lenses were already set up for close focus. Looks like you still get good use from them regardless of the lenses--and boy are those shots graphic examples of the ultra-narrow DOF you are dealing with!

I have not seen the flare/ghosting problems other people have with my 12-24. I've even taken shots with the sun in-frame, and gotten virtually nothing. For example, the following shot was at 12mm, the sun is in-frame near the cables where it gets light. You can see the little streak by some rivets--that's all the flare I got. Not bad if you ask me. This is typical of my experience with the lens. So, I disagree with the general assessment that it's prone to flare (or maybe it's due to my apparent magic touch with lenses ).

Hi Chris,
Yes I totally agree with you that is one cracking good photo. I liked what I saw on the reviews on Fredmiranda.com web site. It is ahead of the Canon 10-22mm. I am certainly getting one.
I am thrilled with the results I got from the macro shots. This, as I said was all done following the exercises Lord Vetinari, Brian, from the Holy Macro Forum. He told me the correct settings to use and what to do exactly. Now having had the foundation stone laid I am positive I can build on this and it is all credit to Brian. I find macrophotography so interesting and it is certainly another angle to photography which one can explore.
Wish you all the best with your 12 -24 F4 lens and your new camera.
Kind Regards
Bob

A Real Tall Order

Comments