tom_dubowski

<p>How about the 150mm Sigma? For about $400USD I could get a 150mm Sigma Macro and cover a further focal length for my event photography. thoughts?</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. Since I MAY want to use this as a portrait lens, I'm still leaning toward the Tamron 90mm or the Sigma 105mm. That COULD let me sell the 85mm 1.8f prime and get into a 70-200 2.8 or f/4. <br> I said I love the fact I can go 200mm, I didnt say I use it at that focal length the whole time. :) I've used it at 70mm as much as 200. It's nice to have the compression at 200mm and the distance when at an event to not be in the way of the wedding party or people. ect.<br> Yes the 55mm or 60mm would be cheap and good as well, but if I can POSSIBLY replace the 85, then I might do that. If I plan on keeping it then maybe spending $200-300 is pointless and rather a $50-100 investment makes more sense. </p>

<p>ya but its heavy! I've heard the weight for the extra stops isnt worth it. Especially if its on the D750 with great DR</p>

<p>So after a couple of months, I'm coming back to give my findings and ask for some more help ...<br> I bought the extension tubes from Kenko, and used them at one wedding. I felt them too cumbersome and a bit of a pain really to put on and off of a dedicated lens (85mm) that I was using for the day. That said, I have since sold the kenko tubes and am not after a zoom for better distances from my subjects.<br> I realize that having a 200mm focal length is a huge bonus, but paying $1500 for the 70-200 f2.8 is definitely out of my budget. So, i think my best value at this point is to try and get the 70-200 f4 Nikon for around $1000. <br> Then try and pick up a super cheap macro (50mm Sigma, or similar) for around $150 or less for those 10-20 shots I plan on taking during a wedding. <br> Thoughts?</p>

<p>I'm doing a xmas photo shoot and am having some trouble trying to keep the background dark, and my subject lit.<br> My baby is about 2-3 ft in front of the backdrop, xmas lights behind her on, the room lights and all blinds shut, and one speedlight 4ft high pointing straight down at my subject. When I take the shot, and properly expose for my subject, the background get lit up as well. I wanted to keep it as it is with ambient light. Any suggestions on how about getting that look?<br> Similar to here <img src="https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/4a/52/d5/4a52d52ebc967ae230028f93910479aa.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="960" /></p>

<p>I've read a on blogs and peter Hurley stuff, and there's always a bunch of keywords and actions he has (as other people do) to make their subjects react and give certain expressions. I'll be shooting a corporate head shot session soon and wanted to know what you guys use as tips to invoke your subjects to pose and give micro expressions for your shots?<br> Some keywords and tips I've read:<br> - Look down, look up<br />- Give me the: blue steel, pretend you ate a lime, looked surprised, happy, look serious, pretend you just won the lottery<br> Other ideas or keywords you use?</p>

<p>I found some polaroid ones for $80 shipped on amazon. I might try those as reviews are good and save my money for a longer focal length lens in the near future</p>

<p>Gents - thank you so much for the advice. I was ready to pull the trigger on the tamron lens when in fact I too thought, why would i need another lens with a similar focal length. I should go up in length or try a diopter or a kenko tube. For now I'm leaning towards the tube.<br> @William - i tried to find the 20mm extension tube but it looks like they all come in sets of 3 - the cheapest I could find was about $120 CND on ebay shipped.<br> I saw a post here, which makes me think the tubes are decent and will produce the types of shots i'm after.<br> https://photography life. com/reviews/vello-auto-extension-tube-set-nikon<br> It will make my wedding bag much lighter too.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Correct people .. I don't have a 70-200mm (yet). <br> I know a lot of guys that dont have a 70-200m, or a 200mm prime and shoot weddings just fine. Plus, at the price of $1000+ for that depth is a lot of cash. I prefer to Get a 100mm/105mm (or 90mm) for detailed shots before getting a long lengs. Maybe it's just me, or my style, but for now I'm happy with my 2 fast primes for weddings.<br> @Rodeo Joe - 4" compared to 5.25" doesnt seem like a huge difference to me ... is it? I could still get a flash in there and light so I'm definitely leaning towards that tamron at $140.</p>

<p>Pretty sure you;'d be better off geting the 17-55mm 2.8 for the DX. Same focal as the 24-70 on the FX body. If you plan on upgrading to D750 at some point, dont bother with DX lenses. Just make the jump now. I just went from that same body (d7000) to a D750, and WOW, what a world of difference. DR and ISO noise is just amazingly better</p>

<p>@Robin - that's great about the 55mm Nikon, but that focal length will mean I'll have to get super close to my subject. Possibly not allowing not enough light into the sensor. Which is why I'm leaning towards a 90mm. As for diopters - I really havent heard much about them, and not sure if that canon one posted is the right one for my lenses, but perhaps looking into to keep the bag light.</p>

<p>@Andy L - The 55m may be a great lens, but its working focal length is a little short. Even if i'm using a flash or LED light as a fill/main. A Tokina 100mm @ $400 is almost 3 times more that the Tamron one I can get.<br> @Pete s - I dont plan on getting a dedicated camera for rings and detail shots when a lens can do what I'm after. Sure pro's use that, but I can comfortably say I'm a pro at this point, nor does my budget allow for much a set up.<br> @Chip - Yea, I'm really leaning towards getting that 90mm right now. It's from a guy who just doesnt use it and it's in almost new condition. I was just looking for some other options and possible ring and detail shots to know it can produce what I'm looking for.<br> @Andrew - Thanks for the info. Yes the tamron I am talking about is the one, pre VR version (172E) the VR is 272E (I believe). As long as I can crank down the aperture and get some good details in ring shots, or some jewelry, ect, ect, then I'd be happy with that. A good investment IMO for $140CND (or $110 USD at the time or writing this - crazy i know). As far as LoCA goes, I wonder if you can remove some of that in post. I checked your pictures and it seem like a lot of Chromatic aberration. Maybe I'm wrong, anyway I dont want to deviated from the original question - which was find a macro lens under $500 - and it seems as though I may have found my answer.</p>

<p>It seems like @ $140 for the Tamron 172E is a great way to go. I dont really care what it looks like on the outside so long as I can capture those special pictures - 20-30 of them (max) - per session. I've seen the 272E go used for twice that and have read there's not much difference between the two - in fact negligible. <br> I definitely wont be getting a zoom lens.</p>

<p>I currently own the 35mm 1.8 and the 85mm 1.8 primes, nothing larger in a zoom or prime for now. I've read mixed reviews about extension tubes and the results of shots, which is why I suggested the lenses above. Also, I've searched around locally and online, and have found the lenses in my first post available and affordable.<br> I've read that I really want a lens with length - 90/105mm since I wont have to get as close as with a 55/60mm lens, which is why I chose those. I suppose SOME bug shots would be cool sometimes, but it's not my primary reason for getting a macro lens.<br> @Shun - If the Tamron has a decent rep, then for the price maybe I should just get that? 90mm 172E. At $140 sounds like a decent option for those 15-20 shots I'll take at an event.<br> @Edward - I think you meant the Nikon 105/2.8 - right? It's twice the cost as the tamron so I'm wondering if it's really worth it for the amount of shots I'll be taking? What is the working distance of a 55/2.8 or 60mm/2.8?<br> Another option was Nikon 60mm F/2.8 Micro AF-D Lens - but at $240CND seemed a little expensive considering my other options and available working distance.</p>

<p>I've been searching around and need a hand (and samples would be good too) of a macro lens for those detail shots while shooting weddings. I really won't be using it much other than that so dont want to break the bank on a $1000 lens.<br> I don't mind manual focus, since I'll be using that quite frequently, but auto would be a bonus.<br> Main body: D750<br />Backup: D610<br> Here are some of my options<br> Nikon 105mm f/2.8 AF-D Micro - $350 CND<br />TAMRON SP AF MACRO 90mm 172E - $140 CND<br />Nikkor 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 MACRO - $140 CND<br />Tamron AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 SP AD - $200 CND<br> Or something else?</p>