Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by phil_burt

  1. <p>Thank you to all that replied or looked at this. I am studying it and will make some decision. I did just find out that Fuji has added a 120mm Macro 1:1 to their lineup. This is on the Fuji page. Indicated that it could be out soon but no numbers as to the price yet. Seeing it is a prime that means it could be very useful for other stuff. More than likely I will wait to see what it is all about, I am sure it will be more than I care to spend unless the other uses make it a good purchase.<br> Thanks again.<br> phil Burt</p>
  2. <p>Good Morning,<br> Trying to get to do a little Macro on the cheap as I doubt I will do much. I shoot with a Fuji XT-2 and have several lenses. (10-24mm - 56mm - 18-135mm). If I remember correctly Canon makes a magnification filter that can go on just about anything? I am wanting to get some opinions on using this vs Extension Tubes. I can get 2 tubes for the XT-2 for about $170.00+ and I am guessing the Canon filter is near that same price. Fuji does make a 60 mm Macro which gives 1/2 life size but that lens is about $600.<br />All I want to do is play a little if I like it I may go for the lens (there is rumors another Fujii macro is on the way).<br />Thanking you all in advance for any opinions.<br> phil burt<br> benton, ky</p>
  3. <p>Thank You all very much for your responses. I have printed all of them and am going to study them hard and fast.<br> Some really great info here.<br> Thanks again,<br> phil b<br> benton, ky</p>
  4. <p>I was a second shooter in a wedding here a couple of weeks ago and we got into the discussion about "White Balance" Now when I am being paid by the main Photographer I do as they wish, I want to say that right up front.<br />My questions is and we discussed this just before the wedding and that is use "Auto White Balance" or set one on the "K" scale and leave it alone.<br />MY thoughts are as one moves around the church/reception hall the lighting changes and so does the white balance. When near a window, then near the overhead lighting it changes.<br /> There was no flash allowed in the church so everything was dependent on the Church's lighting which was mixed in ceiling and wall fixtures and of course ambient light from windows and doors.<br /> Is there any hard fast opinions out there. We were both shooting Nikons, my friend a D610 and myself a D800 and ALL shots were raw then would be developed in LR & PS CC.<br />I say "THANK YOU" to all in advance for taking your time to read and give a response should you have one.<br> philb<br> benton, ky</p>
  5. <p>Shun,<br> Thanks for the reply. The 70-200 is used a lot for Bluegrass concerts where the light is low, high ISO and wide open usually so I really do need the f2.8.<br> phil b<br> benton, ky</p>
  6. <p>Thank you all for your responses, it sure has given me something to think about.<br> I just "Want" to upgrade my lenses to Nikon and wish I had done that from the beginning. The 2 Sigmas I have are very fine lenses and I would only expect a small difference in the prints that I make.<br> One reason is I have been an amateur photographer most of my life and now at age 70 I may be getting close to the end as my eyes are starting to fail. I do have macular degeneration and it is making this difficult.<br> So where I may only have a few good years left I want the best I can afford to round out my years of doing this.<br> After reading all the responses I am opting to change up to the Nikon 24-70 and the Nikon 70-200. I went over my shots in LR and seen that 95% of all my shots are with these two lenses.<br> Thanks again for your time to answer and give your opinions, I do appreciate it.<br> phil b<br> benton, ky</p>
  7. <p>I am considering purchasing the 70-200 F2.8 Nikon lens, I currently use a Sigma 70-200 f2.8. I currently use a Nikon D800 body. I do various types of photography some of which include a small studio set up. I do seniors, Families and some concert photography. I love landscapes as well. I want to add that I am a retired person that just loves photography and most of what I do is for personal satisfaction, occasionally I do have paying clients.<br> Occasionally I do venture outdoors and see where others I know that have the range of a 400mm lens are able to capture the subjects that I can't.<br> What my concerns are is I do want the versatility and image producing of the 70-200 and wonder what I will be giving up if I did select the 80-400. Will I still be able to use the 80-400 in the studio and get as good of results as the 70-200?<br> No way possible I could have both.<br> Other lenses that I have are a 12-24, 85, 100.<br> One last concern has anyone read that either of the Nikons 24-70 or 70-200 will be coming out with new models of these lenses.<br> Thank you so much for taking your time to read this and if you have an opinion I Thank you even more.<br> phil b<br> benton, ky</p> <p> </p>
  • Create New...