hydrologic

<p>Latest Firefox w/default setting here...timeout and untrusted site browser message :( I will try with IE.</p>

<p>+1 Alan. I use several manual and manual/preset lenses on my XTi. Using E-1 is a good starting point. It works with some manuals, not so much with others. For instance, E-1 compensation DOES work with my FD 50mm f1.8, but underexposes with my Vivitar/Cosina 50mm f1.8. Maybe that has something to do with the infinity focus glass adapter on the FD, but I don't know. I do know what worked for me. Get to know your lens. Shoot, shoot and then shoot some more :) Believe in the histogram! You will learn over many trials how your camera reacts to your lens and thus, almost naturally, you will make proper adjustments more quickly and with great precision. Happy shooting with your manual gem!</p><div></div>

<p>If you are looking for more in-depth post processing than global adjustments (Lightroom), CS5 or even PhotoShop Elements are great software, among many. Nothing wrong with trying a "little of all". I did and still do this and find a wealth of learning in doing so. My approach was/is similar, except I am stretching the boundaries of my consumer level second-hands, rebuilds, gifts and adapted manual lenses across these genres. I really only have advice on macro introduction, though.<br>

My macro rig - Inexpensive CU filter lenses, reversing rings and extension tubes. Neewer TT520 Speedlite w/diffuser ($35). Zerene Stacker, for focus stacking techniques in post, if you would prefer more DOF. Bellows instead of extension tubes are often preferred by photographers, but that setup also has its disadvantages. Research.<br>

I use these (mostly tubes) on my standard zooms and primes. They will not yield results as a "true" macro lens would, of course, but I believe that in working to acheive true macro lens quality despite that fact makes a stonger case for your own personal justification in purchasing more costly equipment. Inherently, you will KNOW if macro is a group of techniques that you would even enjoy without having spent extra dough on a lens that may eventually collect dust and/or fetch less money than spent on re sell.<br>

Hope that helps.</p>

<div></div>

<p>People are never satisfied. The responding photographer seemed a bit out of lines, professionally, IMHO, but a bride's (or any client's) badmouthing on a mass social level can be damaging. Still, actions speak louder than ranting words from a dissatisfied blogger.</p>

<p>Here is an example of general "dissatisfaction". I offer free photography sessions locally for just about any occassion for my own experience and PR with clients. Three months ago, I was asked by a metal band to photograph a few shows. They liked my work with another groups' photos I had shot previously.</p>

<p>To say the least, the band leader was "insulted" because the "rage was not captured", as was posted on FB with several other unsavory things about my photos. Well, okay. Bygones.</p>

<p>Yesterday, I received an e-mail asking if I would still be interested in continuing the shoots. Attached to the e-mail were numerous photos done by two other paid photographers and a post script asking if I could "make these [photos] better". Of course, I declined.</p>

<p>That being said, I tend to feel that even if the bride in this situation had paid $1k, $2k or ANY amount above the cost of her cake, it is very likely that negative ranting about cost would have followed. Wack, but true.</p>

<p>Hmmm....I've been looking for some months now for the elusive manual diaphram adapter. No luck. There are lot's of reviews and mentions of it though. Thanks, everyone!</p>

<p>@Dan - <a href="http://code.google.com/p/400plus/">http://code.google.com/p/400plus/</a> - This is the link I was given upon visiting your link. Is this the same "hack" that you are suggesting? The feature that allows more than 3 auto bracketed exposures is the appeal for me, as it IS the very issue I was researching about in the first place! I'm aware that I can manually bracket as many as I want, but that transforms "A" into "M" :) Changing ISO thru the VF is nice too. I have no warranty on this camera. It was bought second (maybe third or fourth)-hand from a pawn shop this year. It is my first "real" attempt at photography and has been rewarding thus far.<br>

@Ariel - That answers my question well. I was curious if the shutter was "waiting" for the mirror trips. I will not be trying the mirror- tape techniqe :) I do not like Errors and certainly do not want repair bills. I don't NEED more fps, but I'd certainly like to have it, though! One day I will upgrade, but I'd like to stretch this body out as far as I can. I don't want toys/tools that I don't know how to use.</p>

<p><a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00SIwJ">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00SIw J</a><br>

I was checking out some archived threads about MLU during AEB...and AEB in general for my XTi. I ran across this thread. In regards to the OP's question, IF the mirror were to remain locked up during the brack eted shots in Continuous Shooting Mode, WOULD/COULD it speed up fps?<br>

One commenter mentioned that someo ne had "taped" the mirror in the up positio n on a Nikon to acheive optimal speed and sharpness in the sequence. Is there merit to this? Afterall, I see the needlessness in the mirror returning to the down position in between each f rame in AEB.<br>

Lastly, if I were to tape the mirror up on my XTi, is there chance that damag e would occur? Of c ourse I realize using and modifying a tool in ways it was not designed can have adverse effect. Is this on e of those situations? I'm very iffy and skeptical of claims of this sort. I'd greatly appreciate some clarificat ion! Thanks!</p>

 

<p>I agree with John B. Go macro, my friend, as the 100mm doesn't "limit" you to close-up work, but offers great quality to infinity.<br>

Close-up work isn't a walk in the park, it's a completely different technique, and to learn this is, in its own right, a new door open. Best regards and good luck!</p>

<p>Haha!! Well done, JC. Only now do I notice the woman's handbad/purse in the retouched photo.</p>

<p>Silhouettes for the win!<br>

@John W. - I, too, was compelled in this thread. I will be testing this, as well.</p>

<p>There are lots of resources here on PN (as well as Google) that offer different solutions for mold/fungus growth. I usually will only purchase lenses like these, however, as I do repairs myself :) Most people pretty much will toss or sell cheap these infected lenses (IF fungus is what your problem is). I've read many articles on fungus abatement from multi-coated lenses and the techniques range from extended UV exposures (which do not harm your glass but could potentially damage other components if you use the "sun ray" method) to disassembly. The latter is my ONLY recommendation for complete abatement, considering the other equipment you keep it around. There is a rumor that, as ALL other strains of mold and fungus do, it can spread to other equipment if not handled and stored properly. I don't know if this is actually true with lens fungus, but I only mention that because you own a 7D. Is it adapted to EOS?</p>

<p>@Les...I too was easily fooled by the "fake" blur until, as mentioned with Jeff's photo, it became the center of attention of the canvas (post) viewing the original. You're example is very nice.<br>

@Jeff...I didn't find your photo less than credible, either. I have taken quite a few photos in which lighting created a similar look, so I sufficed it to think that different equipment "could" easily make those slight differences.<br>

@Ken L...I will concur with others' views that the main idea (for best results for overall learning and knowledge) is to have environments, lighting and subject at optimal just as the shutter releases. IMHO, it may be a never reachable goal that everyone will thrive for just to have the best photo possible, but it is a goal that motivates photographers to constantly learn and persevere through the art. I believe PP methods are great ways to further the subject isolation, especially in cases that the images that hit the sensor or film frame are less than satisfactory to your own subjective taste.</p>

<p>I agree that it will be pricey, but it's exciting nonetheless. I read the article to the end. The new DSLR (not C300 cinema) is mentioned twice, including Smooth Carrots' excerpt. Just saying.</p>

<p>I definitely see a difference in Scott's examples. The eyes behind the specs appear to be more defined/detailed by reducing the brightness of the sky reflection (top of glasses) while not completely removing an "expected and subjectively accepted" amount of glare.</p>

<p><a href="

Here is simple DIY video that discusses a possible solution to problems that are mentioned above. Aperture (f/stop) is incredibly important for DOF. I am not familiar with Nikon bodies or lenses, but they may have the same DOF View that Canon has. When dismounting your lens, your lens aperture blades will probably open to largest aperture. This is not what you want as it narrows your DOF and will not have much of your frame in focus. Youtube is a great reference for many techniques, and thanks to very wise photogs here on PN, I've learned to use it quite often. I use reverse rings, but more useful are extension tubes. With the proper extension tubes, you will not lose your AF and metering capabilities. Good luck! </p><div></div>

<p>I will put a hand up for Topaz Labs DeNoise. I don't like tossing photos or pixels and had a hard time salvaging so many of them due to high ISO noise until I was introduced to Topaz. <a href="http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/">http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/</a> Here is the link to download the free 30-day trial. It's very easy to use and I've consequently purchased the other Topaz plugins solely based on the great results I acheived with this one. It hasn't failed me thus far. Good luck!</p>

<p>Thanks for the great list, Alan, and the awesome advice of the itchy trigger finger, Frank! That makes loads of sense. I do have two 50/1.8 lenses. One is Canon FD adapted to EOS (on which I can't manipulate aperture without some rigging) and an M42 mount Vivitar adapted to EOS, both full manual focus. Also, I have an EF-S 18-55 IS/3.5. I generally use these on tubes for macro, but I've also used them in low light conditions without alot of great results (except in B&W, as Emma has suggested) so I was a bit skiddish about using them. It seems my EF 28-80 V USM/3.5 performed better here. However, I'm beginning to feel I will need to set up new tests that better mimic the lighting conditions I will meet there, because I'm all about saving money. My theory and hope is that the unsavory results were because there was not enough ambient light collected by the lens during indoor shoots without studio lights. At a concert, the area behind me may be pitch black, but the light beaming from stage may be plentiful as long as I fill the frame. As I delve deeper and deeper into macro, I feel my handheld techniques are strengthening, especially with the nice battery grip add-on that makes a world of difference in portrait shooting and overall balance. Even though I have little to nothing to lose and only to gain from this experience, I don't want to screw it up :) I really would like to deliver a great product to them. Their expenses didn't originally include photography, so I kinda feel in the spotlight, too.</p>

<p>Hey, everyone! I was asked to take some shots at a friend's concert, but I really don't have the best gear for it. I was contemplating renting a better body and lens, but considering the amount of energy and chaos that goes along with a typical metal concert, I figured I should stick with my XTi and rent only the lens/lenses. I read another thread on this subject, but the recommendations were for a 60D. That's quite a cut above my body :) My distance from the stage will vary and I'm anticipating that it will be....dark! My friend has already given me a heads up on available space (standing room) and absolutely NO flash allowed from the audience during performance. Ok.<br>

I will also be backstage taking posed and candid shots of the bands, members, setups and anything else that may look interesting. The catch is that I will not be charging anything for the shoot. I'm an amateur looking to extend my portfolio and gain experience. However, if there are some great results, the bands insisted they'd buy them. Win/win. The idea is to have some magical moments for them to publish on their websites and social networking pages.<br>

So, with my body, what lenses and/or settings would be recommended for good results? I'm fairly proficient with my little cam and absolutely love a challenge. Thanks a mil!</p>

 

<p>On this video - <a href="http://youtu.be/wqRn3at0H60">http://youtu.be/wqRn3at0H60</a> - at 2:26, he states that the image is "focus stacked" from about "10 imgaes"...what does that mean?</p>

<p>Hello, everyone. I hope this is the proper forum for this question. I'm trying to use my FD 50mm prime for macro on my Rebel, and it does great. The only problem is setting aperture on the lens to open a bit. I generally use it with my A-1, but when I dismount the lens from the body, blades automatically shut. Is there something I can do to open them manually or is there a setting I can change before dismounting from A-1 body? Thanks!</p>

<p>I must completely concur with Tommy. I posted a question on this forum about Canon macro. The $20 is much better spent on equipment such as the extension tubes and/or reverse mounting kit...$10 and $12-$80 respectively. Go to the thread and checkout the links there. Very helpful stuff.</p>

<p>Scott...thanks!! These videos (especially the single lens setup shotting the crawlies) and links are truly inspirational. This is exactly what I want to get to. It's funny...I paid around $20 for a close up threaded mount lens (threaded magnifying glass) when, for the same cost, could have hade a reverse mount ring AND non-auto focus tube set. Ah well. Should have asked sooner, I guess!! This is great. I will try both double and single lens set up. I have some great FD mount and Pentax primes. I will most probably go for the auto-focus enabled tubes. WOW! Youtube is great. This site is great :) Thanks, again, to everyone. Please don't stop with the wealth of knowledge on this subject.</p>

<p>GORGEOUS! I will try this (both techniques) tomorrow. I will let you know how it works out for me...thanks so much. Truly great in your example.</p>

<p>Also, here is a link that has a small performance list of these suppemental "macro" add ons.<br>

<a href="../learn/macro/">http://www.photo.net/learn/macro/</a></p>

<p>As I was photographing my baby boy and wife, I felt as though I was taking good shots. I wasn't completely wrong, but I forgot to change color settings from B&W to color. My main focus for these shots were their eyes...beautifl blue. I know that since they were recorded in B&W, the options of post process manip have been narowed greatly. I also anticipate that the exact color of their eyes at that moment probably can not be recreated, but is there a way to put "some" color back into them without tryig to recreate the shoot, agle, lighting then using a photomerge and losing precious strand detail? I'm a total amateur and have little experience in PS experimentation. Thanks!!</p>