Advice for almost zero knowledge on camera/photography dude (me)

[spree86]

Hahahaha... I have already been poisoned long time ago... but cannot bring myself to fish out that S$940 for the Tokina 11-16mm... I am now saving up for the cheaper alternative - Tokina 12-24mm... hahahaha....

For cheaper alternative, I think Sigma 10-20 is a better choice

 

[Halfgeek]

Actually 18-55mm is good enough for flowers. No need any other lens. or add on... unless you intent to do macro... Even when you do macro... you do not need the Raynox, because I believe Halfgeek had two lens... one is a prime (cannot remember what focal lenght is that though). Just do a reverse lens method by stacking one lens above the other... or simply reverse the 18-55mm lens to his camera and shoot from there on.

An adapter can easily be bought for a pretty low price... or you can even DIY your own adapter.

Wow I didn't know of this technique, will look for it soon. Btw my other lens which I seldom use is a 16mm f2.8

 

[rhino123]

For cheaper alternative, I think Sigma 10-20 is a better choice

Yep... thinking of that too... read fabulous reviews on both lenses... will go down to the shops one of these days to test them out, then decide.

 

[HighTone]

Yep... thinking of that too... read fabulous reviews on both lenses... will go down to the shops one of these days to test them out, then decide.

Sigma 10-20 shld be cheaper...maybe good alternative also

 

[rhino123]

Argh... deeply poisoned... hahahahaha... I am still debating between the Tokina 12-24mm and the Sigma 10-20mm... not to mention, I am also debating whether I really need them... I have quite a bit of lens in my dry cabinet that I am not using for ages (most of them are manual lens though).

 

[luckyorange]

Yep... thinking of that too... read fabulous reviews on both lenses... will go down to the shops one of these days to test them out, then decide.

^^ mind if I tag along? Haha I like to see ppl spending haha

 

[rhino123]

^^ mind if I tag along? Haha I like to see ppl spending haha

- evil -

hahahaha.

 

[SkyStrike]

Nice pictures! Btw why do u say 18-55mm not enough for flowers? Usually I really go close up to flowers to take picture ;p for landscape it's usually fixed focal lens with wide angle right?

personally, I prefer to have a closeup feel for flowers and at the 55 end of 18-55 at about 20cm away, probably the magnification is not as big as I wanted. Which is why I would like the 55-250 to it. But slapping a raynox will essentially bring my min focusing to about 10cm ++, which is just nice for my usual close ups. But as rhino pointed out, YMMV.

But when using 55-250, you will be standing 1.1m away from the flower even at 55mm :sweat:

Landscape shots, you need not necessarily be using a prime wide angle or a (ultra)wide angle lens. It all depends on your framing work and your subject. I've seen nice shots of landscape shot at 70mm before.

If you want to take macro shots, you might need some modification to your current setup though... read up reverse lens techniques... it is a pretty nifty techniques to use. The only problem is, you might lose your AF capability and so had to use manual focusing to get that shot.

I think apart from MF, you will have to bear with the always wide open shots of f1.8 (if you are using 50mm f1.8). There is a "hack" using the DOF button, but I find it troublesome...

 

[SkyStrike]

Yep... thinking of that too... read fabulous reviews on both lenses... will go down to the shops one of these days to test them out, then decide.

Get the 10-22 :devil:

Argh... deeply poisoned... hahahahaha... I am still debating between the Tokina 12-24mm and the Sigma 10-20mm... not to mention, I am also debating whether I really need them... I have quite a bit of lens in my dry cabinet that I am not using for ages (most of them are manual lens though).

So far, only the 50mm (almost all the time) and 10-22 (maybe 40% of my trips will bring it along...esp when I go flower mode) is making it to my list of underused lens.

^^ mind if I tag along? Haha I like to see ppl spending haha

Evil indeed...

 

[luckyorange]

:bsmilie:Hmm don't think it's evil lei, and maybe I can stop him from buying more stuff? :bsmilie:

 

[Csboi]

Haha it's not a bad thing to stick to my kit lens, with my skills now even of I but good lens results would be almost the same. No use getting a good aid but you don't know how to use that aid to help myself to achieve ace train result. Need to hone my know-how's first

Btw good luck for your nafa test!

HAHA thanks! I think I might have to retake. I don't have the time to train for it.

 

[Csboi]

K, dun say I never warn you.... can get intoxicated...haha...sharing some pictures which I had shot before.

to Achieve shots like waterfall, streams...etc, ND filter which I had a ND110.

To achieve pics like sky and land blends... a GND is needed

Wah nice! Simply nice. It's just... Just too poisonous..

 

[tecnica]

who wants more poison?

 

[HazeMaze]

I dun mind.

 

[tecnica]

10-22 @ 10mm.

don't mind the moving human subjects, haha.

 

[rhino123]

10-22 @ 10mm.

don't mind the moving human subjects, haha.

Frankly speaking... I am not impressed... and so not poisoned... hahahaha...

Seemed pretty distorted and the colour just doesn't seemed right.

 

[spree86]

How abt 11-16?

 

[spree86]

10-22 @ 10mm.

don't mind the moving human subjects, haha.

Colour look overdone and distortion not well controlled. The photo would look better if it's more natural.

 

[tecnica]

Frankly speaking... I am not impressed... and so not poisoned... hahahaha...

Seemed pretty distorted and the colour just doesn't seemed right.

yes, perspective distortion if you will.

the usual landscapes then:

 

[tecnica]

Colour look overdone and distortion not well controlled. The photo would look better if it's more natural.

oh well, to each his own i guess, haha.