FilmPhotography-DuaneHorne

I get to Cleveland a few times a year. Have you tried Dodd's?

I have owned this Macro Lens 100mm 2.8 for about 3 1/2 years. I have not found any need for a tripod collar. I think you interest would be best served by investing that money instead on a Macro Focusing rail. I think I spent 120 dollars a few years ago at B&H photography and bought a the focusing rail and a set of Kenko (3) extension tubes. My entire Macro set up includes the above plus a set of 3 close up diopters and a macro ring light. I will admit that when I have so much stacked the camera seems very lens heavy and if I had a collar I would use it, but would not purchase one. I hope this helps.

I was very pleasantly surprised this evening when I open the mailers from Kodak. I had taken 2 rolls of Kodachrome 200 and taken bird photographs with my Tamron 400 f4 with stacked 1.4 and 2x TC's (nominally 1,120mm @f11). To my amazement, with the exception of some motion blur, the images were pretty sharp and crisp. Unfortunately I did not take notes, I may have had the lens stopped down a bit and that may have accounted for the sharpnest. It is a very good lens. I think the next time I try this I will use 400 speed film and push it one stop.

I purchased a Tamron 400mm f4 a few years ago. It came with an extension tube, a 1.4 converter and a 2X. I purchase it along with a Canon Elan II for 1,000. I am very pleased with this lens. I nearly always use it with the 1.4 conververter giving me an effective focal lenght of 560@ f5.6. I will on occasion stack the 2x on top of the 1.4, if it is relatively bright outside. I can not say enough good things about this lens.

Hi. I shoot @ ISO 200 with an opaque red filter most of the time on my 50mm 1.8 lens. For othere lens sizes, I will use a dark red. I will have to try shooting at ISO 400. Sometimes, I will use flash, and sometimes I will put a red filter over the flash head. I will soon be experimenting with placing an exposed piece of developed Colour IR film over the flash head. It is opaque and I am curious as to the results.

Query

 

I have a question. I own a Sigma 600mm f8 mirror lense. It does pretty well if you know how to use it; bright clear day, tripod and lens hood. Since contrast is one of the complaints levied against CATS, would pushing slide firm a stop or two improve contrast?

I have had good success with the Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II. It does slides and negatives. I have had it for about two years, and for the amount of scanning I do, have no intentions of replacing it. I think I spent 300 USd for it a couple of years back.

I own a Tamron 28-300 zoom lens. I think I purchased it in 2002. It today remains my most used lens. I am very pleased with its performance.

Another one<div></div>

A Macro lens is really the way to go. For greater magnification, it can be used with extension tubes or close up filters, or even both, but you must be aware of some disadvantages. With extension tubes, you get increased close focusing ability but with some light loss, but no reduction in optical quality (personally, I like Kenko tubes, you get a set of 3 for the price of 1 canon or nikon). The converse is true with close up filters; no reduction in light but a requction in optical quality. Of course by using both the problems and benefits are increased. I have tried all of these and will suggest that with any form of close focusing photography, shoot at an aperture of at least f 16, and do everything possible to eliminate

subject motion. I like to use fill flash and I think a macro slide is an invaluable aid.<div></div>

Hi,

 

I have experiment with a warming filter stacked with a polorizer, and, unless the situation absolutely warrants it; i would only use 1 filter at a time for optical reasons. Otherwise, I would go with a warming polarizer, which I have considered purchasing but as of yet, have not.

I own a 600mm F8 mirror lens manufactured by Sigma. Sigma manufactured one of the better mirror lenses; 600mm instead of 500mm @F8. Overall, I was pleased with the results, but became very discouraged by all the negativity surrounding its use. What I learned is that a mirror lens is best used on clear sunny days with a lens hood attached; you must use a lens hood. On cloudy, overcast days their is a very noticable reduction in contrast. As for the bokeh donuts, I have found that if you shoot with an unecumbered background, it is much less objectional. If it is cold outside you must allow the lens to warm up to ambient temperatures otherwise the temperature difference between the lens and the outdoor air will result in thermal convection (heat waves) which makes focusing difficult; astrophotographers will tell you the same thing. Now...I have not used that lens for a year and a half. I purchased a 400mm f4 Tamron Manual lens, which is better, heavier and vastly superior to my Sigma mirror. I will use the Sigma Mirror if I am shooting an outside sporting event on a clear day, like the upcoming Superbowl, if I had tickets. If you can, get a copy of the August 2003 edition of Popular Photography and Imaging. Beginning on page 34 Herb Keppler writes a very informative article on Catadioptric [CAT (mirror] lenses}. Mirror lenses are also good for IR film work. I have a few photos of a morning dove taken with a mirror lens in addition to several lighthouse photos, but I can not copy them here. Both were shot on clear days and the results were satisfactory; I was very well pleased with a few of these images. On the other hand, I attempted to shoot a waterfall in California and well as a falcon, both on overcast days and the result were dismal to say the least. I wish I could display them here so you could judge for yourself. Like any piece of equipment, mirrors can be used with acceptable results as long as you understand their limitations. Plese read Herb Keppler's article.