Macro for nikon d800e

G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Chacon said:
Since I've just joined this community, I'd like to learn how best to share my work publicly in the forums, so it is important for me to post here. Can anyone help me with the preferred settings to use when I export my RAW files to jpgs for uploading here? Diffraction at small apertures is a major issue for macro shooting which would be hard to discern in highly-compressed/lower resolution files. I could upload cropped images to demonstrate the differences as well as the full-sized ones that the OP has requested. I just don't want to bombard this site with multiple 25MB jpgs unless that is what is considered acceptable.

Thanks for any help.
Click to expand...

This post should be able to point you in the right direction. It is better to use the search feature or start on a different thread.

http://nikonites.com/computers-software/7842-free-photo-sharing-sites.html
 
C

Chacon

Senior Member
OK, so let's if this works.

Nikon 85mm f/16 with close-up lens adapter. Full image and cropped.

813_2113.jpg
813_2113.jpg


Zeiss 100mm f/16
813_2115.jpg
813_2115-2.jpg

Nikon 105mm f/16
813_2117.jpg
813_2117-2.jpg

Note that most of my close-up work is done in the studio on stationary objects, so I don't have to worry about fast shutter speeds to freeze the action or to compensate for low light. Shooting f/8 to f/22 is typical for me depending on the desired depth of field.

Take a look at the hair on the lower right corner of the largest "4" above the zero. Can you see the clear winner?
 

Attachments

  • 813_2113-2.jpg
    813_2113-2.jpg
    86.6 KB · Views: 180
Last edited:
K

kiwi86

Senior Member
It is difficult to say anything with such small images. I want to see a full size pictures to open in Photoshop or. Camera raw at 100%. Then no more hide and everything is immediately clear :)
 
K

kiwi86

Senior Member
gqtuazon said:
I would get the Zeiss too but it is a little expensive for a macro lens that I do not often use.
Click to expand...

I think the Zeiss Planar 100 mmm f/2 is very useful. Great for portraits, perfect for landscape, small objects and of course “macro (only 1:2-what crop i needed to achieve 1:1)”. It should also take into account life of the lens. It is usually between 15-20 years. Zeiss lens much higher. And of course Zeiss is synonymous for quality.
 
C

Chacon

Senior Member
kiwi86 said:
Can you send me pictures with any everyday object such glas or apple. To better assess crop options. Thanks!
Click to expand...

OK, happy to oblige - I love playing with these lenses. So I don't waste my time, can you be specific about the depth of field you are interested in. IQ on these lenses can change significantly over the range of aperture settings. The ones I shot yesterday were f/16.
 
K

kiwi86

Senior Member
Thank you Chacon. That's exactly what I needed. The conclusion is simple. If someone photographing mostly true macro (example: insects and water drops) the real macro lens is right choice. If you do not mind to us crop -9 Mb px (3675x2456 px) for the same cut, if you want more DOF and if the primary purpose to photograph objects from a few inches further (flowers and small objects) then the better choice is Zeiss.
 
J

JDFlood

Senior Member
I have the 200mm, 105mm, and 60mm. The 105mm is my favorite, can get far enough away, and with VR is a great 105mm lens for general purpose photo. The 60mm is best for travel, swap with normal lens to save weight. Expect to crawl around on the ground a lot though. JD
 
J

JDFlood

Senior Member
It is a great lens, lets you get the furthest away. But it is long and heavy and fairly slow for other photography. So, it is not a great compliment ( for me) when I go out shooting. If I go out with one purpose only, like shoot mosses, I'll take a flash and the 200mm. I've, been meaning to get a Nikon ring flash setup for it... I think that would push it over the top and make it more desirable, but still just when macro is my only goal. JD
 
Top