Paul_Mc
13th of October 2004 (Wed), 18:25
Hello! me again! ;) Sick of me yet? ok well not so fast! As i continue my quest for that most suitable lense I sit here confused as ever. Would thou helpeth me out-eth? ;-)
I know the 180 has a better reach than 100 lenses. And I also know that using a tripod with 1:1 is most essential. And I want 1:1 ;)
I also want to someday print out 11x16's or larger of my macro shots.
Therefore quality is essential.
But can I get away with NOT using a tripod and using the flash to freeze subjects? Or is this method still not as good as a tripod? What about daylight situations, will a flash freeze a bee flying near a flower or will i need to setup, sit and wait with my tripod and trigger release?
What are you successful methods? Again, it's all about the bugs for me. Should I take my tripod with camera and lense attached , at the ready, and search for bugs? Or stake out a flower for visitors? I'm talking for the bugs that move a lot or are easily scared (butterflies, dragonflies, etc)
Also I have John Shaw's Closeup book, and he uses 105 lense almost 90% of the time! And he talks about handheld too over tripod. So that doesn't help. And hardly any photos of 180 compared to 100 as well.
The whole thing that confuses me around this matter is getting a tripod or not, the setup problems and missing moving subjects, which also relates to getting either the 180 or 100 for the distances.
I am really in the need of some advice. If I use a flash system and handheld, if i get my technique down, and i print these images, will they be as goos as a tripod shot? What i mean is will you notice THAT much of a difference?
I'm arguing with myself constantly over this tripod/handheld/working distance issue. I hate to invest in a 180 and hardly anyone uses it (either most people have nikon 200's or canon 100 lenses)
Thanks SO much AGAIN!
I know the 180 has a better reach than 100 lenses. And I also know that using a tripod with 1:1 is most essential. And I want 1:1 ;)
I also want to someday print out 11x16's or larger of my macro shots.
Therefore quality is essential.
But can I get away with NOT using a tripod and using the flash to freeze subjects? Or is this method still not as good as a tripod? What about daylight situations, will a flash freeze a bee flying near a flower or will i need to setup, sit and wait with my tripod and trigger release?
What are you successful methods? Again, it's all about the bugs for me. Should I take my tripod with camera and lense attached , at the ready, and search for bugs? Or stake out a flower for visitors? I'm talking for the bugs that move a lot or are easily scared (butterflies, dragonflies, etc)
Also I have John Shaw's Closeup book, and he uses 105 lense almost 90% of the time! And he talks about handheld too over tripod. So that doesn't help. And hardly any photos of 180 compared to 100 as well.
The whole thing that confuses me around this matter is getting a tripod or not, the setup problems and missing moving subjects, which also relates to getting either the 180 or 100 for the distances.
I am really in the need of some advice. If I use a flash system and handheld, if i get my technique down, and i print these images, will they be as goos as a tripod shot? What i mean is will you notice THAT much of a difference?
I'm arguing with myself constantly over this tripod/handheld/working distance issue. I hate to invest in a 180 and hardly anyone uses it (either most people have nikon 200's or canon 100 lenses)
Thanks SO much AGAIN!