vikas_kohli

<p>I would recommend 50 1.4 or even 1.8 as portrait.</p>

<p>35 is too wide for portraits.. as others said as well </p>

<p>Thanks Matt, Long, Peter, Stephen. </p>

<p>So I can breathe easy.. looks like it is indeed expected to have shallow DOF. It's just that I kept hearing (before buying) that this will work well as portrait lens also...</p>

<p>I am still experimenting with some small toys - my son's Bakugan collection and a 'Hulk' figure where we found a cavity (uneven paint) in Hulk's denture so we are using that as a good teaching point to my son to brush regularly... ha ha </p>

<p>I have a Sigma 50 1.4 and love that for portraiture and as Matt said... I agree that a perfect lens varies based on location / distance </p>

<p>I just got the 90mm macro from Tamron, which is impressing me quite a lot it being my first macro lens ever. </p>

<p>I have noticed two things and am looking for help with them :</p>

<p>1. Depth of field seems to be quite shallow even at f 7.1. Is this normal ? What should be the f stop if I am looking for say covering a whole flower or a small bakugan :D </p>

<p>2. Aperture is not truely 2.8 all the way.. but only 2.8 at 10 ft plus focusing distance. Is this normal for all macro lenses ? (Maybe I was assuming 2.8 to be standard like a prime... )</p>

<p>What would be the recommended aperture for portraiture with this lens ? </p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your inputs / suggestions.</p>

<p>@parv. - I thought you knew abt that s/w.. hence I asked. </p>

<p>I will ask around. Thanks </p>

<p>@parv. - I thought you knew abt that s/w.. hence I asked. </p>

<p>I will ask around. Thanks </p>

<p>Can someone please confirm if there is a "Nikon supplied software " that shows the point of focus in a picture ?</p>

<p>Just like the OP I also struggle with where did the focus go in some of the pictures after taking the shots. generally I can figure out staring at the screen, but would be nice if a s/w (and Nikon free if possible) can do that for me.</p>

<p>Wow ! I am jealous of your "Nikon system" deal :) you got some nice lenses there, assuming all of them are Nikon lenses there.</p>

<p>I am also looking for best portrait tutorial / lessons and would appreciate that info as well..</p>

<p>Yes.. something is up with that one :) Amazon also had in stock about 6 weeks ago but then went off stock, and I see only a few sellers on Amazon as well as eBay only who have them.</p>

<p>As Shun said call them if you want it, at least they will tell you the story</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks - but I saw that 3401 is actually a bit taller... given you are 6 feet and I am only 5 ft 7 in... I guess if 3402 is good for you it will be ok for me too.. </p>

<p>Thanks again for your help</p>

<p>Thanks.. and I know you had recommended ct-3402 (and not ct-3401) - can I ask you why ?</p>

<p>ct-3401 : <a href="http://www.feisol.net/feisol-foursection-tripod-ct3401-with-tripod-p-26.html">http://www.feisol.net/feisol-foursection-tripod-ct3401-with-tripod-p-26.html</a></p>

<p>ct-3402 : <a href="http://www.feisol.net/feisol-foursection-tripod-ct3402-with-tripod-p-27.html">http://www.feisol.net/feisol-foursection-tripod-ct3402-with-tripod-p-27.html</a></p>

<p>Thanks all (and Robert Cooper... I found you again :) )<br>

Feisol has now two types - one which is the older version, and newer one with Rapid and better rotating legs... (with additional $50+ price) so not sure anyone would have tried the newer models or can comment if older ones are good value for price.<br>

Robert - can you please comment if weight of about total 3 lbs of Feisol (compared with 3.75 lbs of Monfrotto) makes it less stable ? Is that a good compromise for weight and stability to go with 3 lbs tripod (am thinking of getting it with 498RC2 ballhead).<br>

Problem with Feisol's is that I really can't go to a store and see it in person as there are no stores in NYC / NJ who I know sell it.</p>

<p>Thanks Camilla. Feisol is not that cheap at the moment, considering I will have to buy center column separate and I can get Monfrotto cheap on eBay. </p>

<p>Do you actually hand stuff on the column to make it stable ? then that defeats the purpose wy to buy CF - no ? I was expecting it to be quite stable actually</p>

<p> </p>

<p >On the old thread I had started thinking of a tripod here <a href="../nikon-camera-forum/00W7WS">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00W7WS</a> and got some great advice, but need a final finer point answer. (@Robert Cooper... hoping you see this thread :) )</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Can someone please give their recommendation between Manfrotto model 055CXPRO4 <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001GIPR62/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001GIPR62/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER</a> </p>

<p >and</p>

<p >Feisol CT-3402 <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.feisol.net/feisol-classic-tripod-ct3402-rapid-p-27.html" target="_blank">http://www.feisol.net/feisol-classic-tripod-ct3402-rapid-p-27.html</a><br />(with extra center column for Feisol)</p>

As I had said in the other thread, I will be using it with D90 and biggest lens I have is 70 - 300

Thanks, I appreciate your help. Sorry had to start a new thread as forum style does not bump old thread up even if I ask a new question there.

<p > </p>

<p>I have a strong feeling that OP's question has been answered and the thread is moving towards irrelevant discussion about tax fraud etc.<br>

<br />Shun - an we please close it now ?</p>

<p>Or actually any opinions on</p>

<p>Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001GIPR62/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001GIPR62/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER</a> <br>

vs<br>

Feisol CT-3402 <a href="http://www.feisol.net/feisol-classic-tripod-ct3402-rapid-p-27.html">http://www.feisol.net/feisol-classic-tripod-ct3402-rapid-p-27.html</a><br>

(and extra center column for Feisol) </p>

<p>Nothing wrong - same kit / body.</p>

<p>I had bought mine from Wally's online store earleir this year when they had 20% bing cashback going, they got me sale and J&R lost it... even though wally had tax for me in NJ... they beat J&R's price.</p>

<p>However, there are may people who in their own right do not buy from there... their call :)</p>

<p>@Robert Hooper - I am at a point when I am ready to pull the trigger... but Feisol have seemed to gone up in aprice a bit - no idea why ! So prompted me to compare Feisol CT-3301 <a href="http://www.feisol.net/feisol-threesection-tripod-ct3301-with-tripod-p-25.html">http://www.feisol.net/feisol-threesection-tripod-ct3301-with-tripod-p-25.html</a> with Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 <a href="http://www.manfrotto.com/Jahia/site/manfrotto/pid/16519?livid=68&lsf=68&child=2">http://www.manfrotto.com/Jahia/site/manfrotto/pid/16519?livid=68&lsf=68&child=2</a> / <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-190CXPRO3-3-Section-Carbon-without/dp/B0015MFTE4">http://www.amazon.com/Manfrotto-190CXPRO3-3-Section-Carbon-without/dp/B0015MFTE4</a> </p>

<p>Can you / someone please comment on why one is better than the other ? (Also for Feisol I would be buying additional center column kit)</p>

<p>Thanks for all your responses.. but what does a macro lens give me that 18-105 or 70 -300 won't give me (is it only the 2.8 vs lower aperture ?)</p>

<p>What should be the magnif ratio one should look for ? </p>

<p>Sorry could not add couple more things.. which I edited below but I was past 10 mins edit limit. Mods if you can take the whole of section below and merge with prior post that would be great.. </p>

<p>

<p>I haven't done any macro photography yet, but work of champions here (Lil Jud comes to mind) amazes me every time I see the pics clicked by them, and am looking for a future Macro lens recommendation.</p>

<p>I understand that you need to have some tele length available so that you can stay away from the creatures/bugs as well as use flash if needed. I see myself clicking lots of flowers etc as well, probably more than bugs.. but I am guessing buying a lens with more tele is better than shorter tele length... but I might be wrong.<br>

<br />What else is important thing for macro lens ? (I have D90 and have 18-105 VR, 70-300 VR, 35 1.8 and Sigma 50 1.4). What about the ratio... ? and what can a macro do that my existing lenses can not do other than give me more aperture at 90/105 ? </p>

<p>Also are macro lenses strictly for macro (extreme closeup is what I think macro is supposed to mean... micro to be correct?) or can they or should they be used for general pictures etc ?</p>

<p>I hear good things about Tamron 90mm (but just recently returned Tamron 17- 50 as it won't focus right) and it's priced within my range too. Are there any other recommendations for a beginner macro experience ?</p>

</p>

<p>I haven't done any macro photography yet, but work of champions here (Lil Jud comes to mind) amazes me every time I see the pics clicked by them, and am looking for a future Macro lens recommendation.</p>

<p>I understand that you need to have some tele length available so that you can stay away from the creatures/bugs as well as use flash if needed. I see myself clicking lots of flowers etc as well, probably more than bugs.. but I am guessing buying a lens with more tele is better than shorter tele length... but I might be wrong.<br>

What else is important thing for macro lens ? (I have D90) what about the ratio... ? </p>

<p>Also are macro lenses strictly for macro (extreme closeup is what I think macro is supposed to mean... micro to be correct?) or can they or should they be used for general pictures etc ?</p>

<p>I hear good things about Tamron 90mm (but just recently returned Tamron 17- 50 as it won't focus right) and it's priced within my range too. Are there any other recommendations for a beginner macro experience ?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>yes - i had issues as well with 17 - 50.</p>

<p>it's sitting in a box ready for ups to pick up and send back... <a href="http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00WHhO">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00WHhO</a></p>