JohnK007 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
notherenow wrote:
Another better shot today with the same combination.
Still out of reach of a tripod and could not have done anything other than a single shot.
Again, not showing my abilities but showing that greater than 1:1 variable macro is possible with this cheap set up.
No one disputing that there aren't many ways of going beyond 1:1.
The point isn't to confuse someone with 'every possible' option, the point is to lead the O/P to the best solution possible.
Since the thread topic is "Macro from Canon to Nikon beyond 1:1," my assumption is that the O/P was speaking of field use (as opposed to stdio), and since Nikon is what I shoot in the field, specifically, with some pretty clean results, I feel I am qualified to answer the question.
I have put a lot more thought, time, and trial-and-error into my macro shooting than many ... whereas you shoot Sony, and apparently are walking around 'taking macro snapshots' for the first time in years ... posting sub-optimal photographs that reflect your lack of time, effort (and macro experience) ... and then you're offering your token efforts as 'advise.'
Please realize there are many members of this forum who shoot exquisite macro images ... who have a ton of experience ... and who have world class macro rigs ... and to whom I (and anyone else) would stop and listen to their perspective. Even if I don't adopt what they're doing, I will still profit from understanding their thought process .... and the motives behind what they're doing ... and seeing their setups ... because they're posting the truly sublime results that reflect their efforts.
So when I see some guy come on here, who doesn't shoot much macro, who self-admittedly 'doesn't have the patience' to strive for optimal results, and who then posts sub-optimal images that he himself admits "aren't all that great" ... do you really expect any seasoned photographer to stop what they're doing and follow your 'advice'?
I am not trying to be mean, but you're just not being realistic. The image you just posted isn't even composed to the subject's body shape, and (while fairly clear) it is badly diffracted, and it sports the kind of 'yellowish cast' that prompts me either to hit my delete button ... or to utilize my white balance feature in Lightroom.
If we can get back to the thread topic, beyond 1:1 with Nikon, a person can get the Laowa 60mm 2x, but using the right Nikkor AI-S zoom can get you that, and beyond 2:1, with better lens craftsmanship, and more overall field versatility.
Using an adapter, or an extender, is always a compromise. No one uses them unless they have to.
A person can stack lenses-on-lenses too, but this is a PITA, adds weight + a level of awkwardness you don't need, and is sub-optimal also.
A person can buy the cheapest Series E Nikkor lens too ... but why not just get a TRULY GOOD lens, that reverses?
In fact, I am right now rubbing my chin about upgrading to a Zeiss Milvus lens (35mm for ~1.8x-2x) ... and the Zeiss Distagon T* (25mm for 2.8-3x) to see how these work for the studio shots I get. (The Zeisses for Canon do not have an aperture control ring, whereas the Zeisses for Nikon do, the latter thereby allowing you to still control the aperture when you reverse.)
The Zeiss Otus 28 has too big a front filter (and optic) to reverse, as do the other Zeiss lenses (15mm, 21mm) ... but Nikkor's best AI-S lenses, reversed, are more than sufficient to get optimal results. They also can be used in their intended capacity as wides and are thus a true pleasure to bring in the field: small, light, made to the highest standards, very capable, highly-versatile.
Anyway, not trying to rain on your parade, but just trying to show the difference between 'another' way ... and a much better way.
|