Hi, first time trying out macro photography. Pardon my noob pictures and not close up enough as i'm using my 18-55 kit lens for this. :sweat:
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
not marco ...... my 2cts
Too big to be considered macro-- My opinion
Be aggressive and go closer. If it's flower focus on a single bloom, if it's insect (it's not easy, I understand), fill it's whole body covering at least 50% of the frame. Best is to get its eyes focus.
with kit lens, challenge would be min focusing distance and max magnification. a budget solution would be raynox. definitely cheaper than a canon 100mm usm macro
my suggestion: for a start, look for less challenging subjects. bees and butterflies are :sweat: they almost never stop moving.
look for nice flowers, and slower insects that won't hop / fly away in a hurry when you go close. they will allow you to practice your close-up technique.
trying to chase a fast moving insect around through your VF is a recipe for motion sickness... first few times i tried, i nearly :ipuke:
keep shooting n keep a lookout of whats the pro here are posting n u will definely made it in time to come
I guess u have tried your best to shot like macro.
Maybe you consider to use dedicated macro lens for macro.
Don't despair. CS Detritus had made good propositions for you to explore and using 18-55 with Raynox 250 would mean you need to use the farther reach, at 55mm. You also have other options including loaning/borrowing a Macro lens or buying a telephoto + Raynox or getting a 2nd hand lens...
nice try . . . keep it up . . .
Yes, get the Raynox DCR-250.
That's how I get started with, from 18-55mm or 50mm lens, to 2nd hand 55-200mm lens, and still attach it to a 105mm macro lens for more magnification. It's very useful, so if you have interest, go with this inexpensive purchase first.
Yeah will go check out the raynox! Btw won't it affect IQ? I heard from some of my friends that raynox will affect IQ. @_@
Don't despair. CS Detritus had made good propositions for you to explore and using 18-55 with Raynox 250 would mean you need to use the farther reach, at 55mm. You also have other options including loaning/borrowing a Macro lens or buying a telephoto + Raynox or getting a 2nd hand lens...
slightly lah... unless u're a compulsive pixel peeper, the pix are very usable and its a reasonable compromise - good magnification for slight loss in IQ.
for beginners, its a very affordable way to get started in macro. the raynox 250 is $125 last i checked.
slightly lah... unless u're a compulsive pixel peeper, the pix are very usable and its a reasonable compromise - good magnification for slight loss in IQ.
for beginners, its a very affordable way to get started in macro. the raynox 250 is $125 last i checked.
Honestly, for me... I wouldn't be too concerned over the image quality especially if the essence of the picture is compromised. The latter will totally 'spoil' the shot. Yes, it's $125 but there used to be other CS members selling used Raynox for lower. You might want to put up a WTB. Personally, I would prefer a dedicated 1:1 macro. The choice is really yours.
Ooh ok. Btw noob question. If i use raynox 250 i can just use my cam as per normal right? Can use af all those etc? Or is there somethings i have to take note of??
But now i'm on budget constraint so i might try out the raynox and when i saved up enough than i shall go for 100L macro. :devil:
haha... yes AF will work but whether it will lock on the correct thing or not, i don't know. ;p
i MF when i do macro... my favourite macro lens is an old-school MF lens that turns almost 2 full rounds to focus from infinity to min-focusing distance :lovegrin: love it to bits.