View Full Version : Another of those "what lens" threads
instantsquid
23-05-08, 14:01
A year or so back, I ditched my faithful FinePix "point n click" jobbie for a second-hand Canon 10D. It's a chunky old thing but was a decent camera in it's day - and I didn't pay a lot for it.
It came with two lenses, a Canon 35-105mm and a Canon 80-200mm, neither of which is any use whatsoever for taking pictures of my tank.
So the birthday is approaching and I got to thinking a new lens might be in order - but I haven't a clue where to start. So, suggestions please! What do you recommend for general all-round "tank shots" and macro shots?
instantsquid
24-05-08, 16:12
That'll be a "no" then! :laugh:
:(
Think the general consensus is that a canon 100mm macro f2.8 is a great lens pricey though about £360 on autcion site
Depends on your budget Ian.
Macro lenses. There are lots to chose from Tamron 90mm, Sigma 105mm, Canon 60mm, Canon 100mm etc. Most people here seem to use the Canon 100mm(myself included) but thats not to say the others arnt good. I think Clippo uses the Tamron 90 and a few use the Canon 60mm. The Canon 60mm wont fit your 10D though.
All these lenses give 1:1 magnification meaning you can fill the frame with something around 2cm across. The longer the focal length the further away you can/have to be to achieve that magnification which is good some applications for example macros of insects but can be bad for others like taking pics of stuff at the front of your tank in a really tight right- which is the reason some people use the 60mm (Dave P/Tony B?).
The Canon 100mm is the most expensive out of that lot, but it does have its advantages- mostly being internal focussing which is more useful than you think when you have to go back to using the kit lens for a few pics where you have the lens against the glass! I got mine for around £240 after Canon Cashback (still need to send it!!!) through "Kerso".
All round tank lens: lol I have a small tank so pretty much get away with using the 100mm for all my shots, but have sometimes had to retreat to the kit lens to get a more wide angle shot. There are loads of lenses that suit this task but I dont have much experiance with using other than these 2 for tank pics. I seem to remember Reef Bloke liking his Sigma 17-70 so that might be one to look out because its rather cheap and I belive it 'does macros' to some degree.
Jeff.
PS. Tony me thinks we need a stickied thread about macro lenses since this comes up often.
I've been borrowing a Tamron 28-75mm f,2.8 for a few weeks which seems to be a great general lens and works well for FTS and general fish and coral pics:thumbsup: it also has macro (although not as good as a dedicated macro lens would be).
I'm certainly going to buy one myself (around £250)
Jim
Hi Ian, camreas and lenses, are a very personal thing, it is like music, all the lenses being suggest are all good, and there are many out there, personally i bought a Sigma 90 300 mm, it is a nice looking lens, i dislike it, it might be me, i might be gettign old, i do not know, but i find it heavey, it has a good macro though, i have taken some great pics with it, but i find i need a tripod these days, and the one i have a Manfrotto so very heavy. The Canon D10 is a great camera, I use aD20 (just uped my Firmware, due to this site cheers). Basically it is not always down to the equipment alone, you need to practice, I have a degree in Photomedia (not bosting) and i have yet to master the technique of photographing my tank, you could look on EBay for any of the lenses (unless new) just make sure they fit the D10 ENJOY, Alex
Is a good flash as important as a good lens?
Reef bloke
25-05-08, 12:42
As mentioned lens choices are based on your personal photographic needs.You should have asked to have a crack at my canon 100mm 2.8 at Craiggs Ian.Using a macro is quite different to using other lenses and you may find macro isnt your bag.
That said i never regret purchasing mine,i have taken quite a few decent fish pics wit it.I find its also a great portrait lens with super sharp optics.
As Jeff mentions Kerso is a good bet for purchase,where mine came from and Canon usually honour cash back from him.
As for flash,id go for a decent lens before a flash any day of the week.Get a lens that has a wide aperture(around 2.8 or lower) and you may find you dont even need a flash to get a decent shutter speed.I do use my flash quite a bit off shoe for tank and its great but if the lens isnt fit for its purpose then the flash wont help much imo.
For general fish shots i use a 17-70mm Sigma,not the best lens in the world but mine seems to be a very sharp copy.
instantsquid
25-05-08, 16:42
My Fuji had a macro mode which I very much enjoyed using, so although I appreciate it's a "niche" option - I'd certainly like to consider it. There's so much going on in my tank that I struggle to see with my failing eyes! :laugh:
Wish there was a "try before you buy" option! :D
As far as a macro lens goes the Canon 100mm is a good choice for all round macros, and, depending on your budget, there are several others, but just bear in mind the compatability, and have a look at a few in Jessops or a similar local camera shop to check out what they're like before you buy online.
A year or so back, I ditched my faithful FinePix "point n click" jobbie for a second-hand Canon 10D. It's a chunky old thing but was a decent camera in it's day - and I didn't pay a lot for it.
sorry, is this an old model or something, because the 10D's Ive used, among many other canons in my experience and photography GCSE are FAR from chunky. Yes, they might be slightly larger than the more compact everyday amateur digitals, but as far as digital SLR's go, you get an aweful lot for your space on the canons, and are both lighter and smaller than Nikons, so unless theres an older model which I havnt seen, I cant really see how you can call the canons 'chunky' as for a professional grade camera, its near the top of it's class.
As for a flash, they're not too widely used in Marine photography, as the quantity of white light wipes out any of the balances we love in a good MH, e.t.c. but if you want a flash that is veratile for changes to patterns e.t.c, and could be used for photography other than fish, I own, and highly recommend a Canon Speedlight 580EX 2, which produces great quality lighting effects, and can be used in many applications, as well as a master for controlling any other wireless remote flashes that you may be using, albeit one of the more expensive models.
HTH
Blub
jimblonduk
25-05-08, 17:49
Ian, have you tried these people ...
http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/
Have a word with Stewart, he's a good guy
Gary
If you are looking for a versatile flash, then try hammerheads such as the Metz, for the Canon D10 you would need the 45CL-Digital. These have the ability to swival the flash head so you can bounce your lighting, you can take them off the camera, to an extent, they will cove ANY lens you would ever likely use, and don't forget unlike film, with digital, you can sinc your flash to a greater range of speeds, hope that helps, flash through glass is not an e asy one though, and you will lose the subtle lughting of the tank, Alex
instantsquid
25-05-08, 18:22
sorry, is this an old model or something, because the 10D's Ive used, among many other canons in my experience and photography GCSE are FAR from chunky. Yes, they might be slightly larger than the more compact everyday amateur digitals, but as far as digital SLR's go, you get an aweful lot for your space on the canons, and are both lighter and smaller than Nikons, so unless theres an older model which I havnt seen, I cant really see how you can call the canons 'chunky' as for a professional grade camera, its near the top of it's class.There's only one model of Canon 10D - it's a metal body so instantly weighs more than the plastic bodied dSLRs. I can assure you that if you pick up a 10D after (say) a 400D you'll feel the difference!
As for a flash, they're not too widely used in Marine photographyNot sure how true that is, but I'll bear it in mind.
Oh, I the 10 D I used had a plastic body, as do most Canons, which would explain why it would be so heavy :laugh:, but as for the 400D, that blatently would weigh in lighter as its only about 60% of the size to make it more practical for everyday use.
Most people dont use flashes except in photography for marine index or encyclopedias for 'mug shots' of the fish to show an example of the fish. Unless you toy around with the flash filters, the shot will look very un-natural and have a very captive effect. Having said that, obviously there are many fantastic photos using a flash for aquariums, but in the main, marine photography is usually left flash-less to produce an image using the lighting and 'natural lit' colour composition of the corals in the aquarium.
instantsquid
25-05-08, 20:00
Oh, I the 10 D I used had a plastic body, as do most Canons, which would explain why it would be so heavy, but as for the 400D, that blatently would weigh in lighter as its only about 60% of the size to make it more practical for everyday use.Then it wasn't a 10D was it? Sorry if I can't take you seriously, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Canon still make metal-bodied cameras (1D, 5D, 40D, etc.) - the 10D was the forerunner to these models. This was the basis of my original comment - "a chunky old thing". :rolleyes:
Oh, I the 10 D I used had a plastic body, as do most Canons, which would explain why it would be so heavy :laugh:, but as for the 400D, that blatently would weigh in lighter as its only about 60% of the size to make it more practical for everyday use.
Most people dont use flashes except in photography for marine index or encyclopedias for 'mug shots' of the fish to show an example of the fish. Unless you toy around with the flash filters, the shot will look very un-natural and have a very captive effect. Having said that, obviously there are many fantastic photos using a flash for aquariums, but in the main, marine photography is usually left flash-less to produce an image using the lighting and 'natural lit' colour composition of the corals in the aquarium.
all THE CANON "PROFESSIONAL" Digital cameras have an alloy (not sure what) bodies, they are intended for proffesional use so have to be more capable of withstanding the knocks of everydway use, unlike the high range domestic DSLR cameras, my D20 likewise is heavy, so obviously what you were looking at was NOT the D10, Alex
instantsquid
25-05-08, 20:30
It's a magnesium alloy I believe.
Reef bloke
25-05-08, 21:45
Yep the 10d,20d,30d,40d all have mag alloy bodies.The 400d is lighter but even so Canon uses high grade heavy duty plastics on those bodies so they are reasonably heavy compared to bridge cameras.I personally like a heavier body as they are usually better balanced with the lens plus i dont tend to shake as much and feel better grounded if you know what i mean.
ok, sorry about that then. I was sure it was just the same as the others I used, but as for "clearly not knowing what I was talking about", other than the professional photographers among us on the forum, I probebly have one of the largest experiences with the Canon range, so I dont think you should be taking this one account to such a great assumption.
my bad, sorry, I will admit that I must have been wrong about the body.
Blub
Yep the 10d,20d,30d,40d all have mag alloy bodies.The 400d is lighter but even so Canon uses high grade heavy duty plastics on those bodies so they are reasonably heavy compared to bridge cameras.I personally like a heavier body as they are usually better balanced with the lens plus i dont tend to shake as much and feel better grounded if you know what i mean.
That's it magnesium, I used to have a Eos 30 it was a film based camera, Nice camera, I was cyling thrrough Croydon (I was still cycling in them days) the camera flew out of bag on back of bike it bounced a couple of times, btu not a scratch on it, the Metz was fine, not so the flash/camera adaptor, smashed to pieces, go figure. I personally prefer the heavier camera, i find it easier to steady, i am fortunate enough to own a Hassekblad 500cm, just wish i could afford the digi back for that, ah well:(. No more cycling No weddings, No money, no more living in Surrey but life is fun
ok, sorry about that then. I was sure it was just the same as the others I used, but as for "clearly not knowing what I was talking about", other than the professional photographers among us on the forum, I probebly have one of the largest experiences with the Canon range, so I dont think you should be taking this one account to such a great assumption.
my bad, sorry, I will admit that I must have been wrong about the body.
Blub
You know I am the same about cars! they have a wheell at each corner.....
When you use a lot of cameras, who amongst us would really remeber each and every one, NOT ME that's for sure, I had to look up the model of the camera I used to have the Eos 30, so I certainly do not think aanyone thought the worst of you for mistaaking one body for another, Alex
yer, sorry Instant squid for any hard feelings, Ive been thinking about it and reading back over some of our posts, I really didnt mean to get on your back mate, so sorry if there was any friction there; I didnt want to rub up any arguments ;).
All of the lenses mentioned so far are good, but at the end of the day you need to make a choice! A lot go for the faster USM focusing of the Canon 100mm whereas others save the extra and buy the equally good (if not slightly sharper) Tamron 90mm.
Your best bet is to go to Jessops and have a play. See which you prefer the feel of. Admittedly you won't be able to test the optics as such but with Macro I think it's more about the feel of the thing.
My only personal comment would be that the fast autofocus on the Canon is somewhat wasted simply because with Macro you normally focus manually anyway! It does however offer internal focusing so there's no annoying lens extension like the Tamron. See, trade-offs ;)
Also, one of the best things you can do to improve your shots is to get an external flash (I wouldn't personally recommend a hammer head unless you want to become a pap!) and an off camera cord.
Some of the best shots I've achieved have been with the flash on a tripod at 45 degrees to the tank and the camera hand held. This allows MUCH better mobility for chasing fish around the tank, limits the amount of nasty flash bounce and offers surprisingly natural colour reproduction (set your white balance with a grey card first).
Oh and don't forget the fast aperture of a macro also makes it a very useful lens for portrait use ;)
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.