pearls before swine-inherited photography equipment

[hopeless amateur]

As my log-in implies, I am a hopeless amateur photographer (embarrassingly so for this forum I'm sure). I have a rather inverted problem relative to most of what I've seen in the equipment threads. As my post title suggests, I have a pearls before swine questions (I'm the swine of in this scenario). I have only owned a point and shoot camera for about a year and have no technical knowledge about photography at all except the "on" button and "fully automatic" mode. (I can hear a collective grown from reading this) Recently I have inherited what I think is a very good set of camera equipment (you tell me?). In fact, the equipment seems so nice that I'm a bit afraid to use it and I'm not really sure what to do with it all. I do know that I want to give it a go. The person who I inherited this collection from was a serious flower and bee photographer and this doesn't represent all of his old (new) equipment. Here is what I have: a Canon EOS 20D with these lenses: MP-E 65mm macro, EF 180mm macro L, EF 24-70mm L, EF 70-200mm L USM IS, and EF 100-400mm L IS. All of the lenses appear to be canon. One of them I don't think was even ever used. I'm so new to photography that I am just learning what the mm and f means on each lens. I also have a gitzo 2227 tripod with a detachable ball head, a MT-24 EX macroflash (I have no idea how this works?) some odd clampy things that hold their position well and look like plastic snakes. It appears that they attach to the tripod to hold small objects in front of the camera??? Some round shiny reflectors about a foot in diameter, a roundish tripod (sort of) that sits about an inch or two off of the ground and can hold the ball head-the world's shortest tripod?, an ADORAMA head that sits on the tripod and can move in millimeter increments both forward and back and side to side, a few compact flash cards, three different camera backpacks (lowepro trekker II and some two other lowepro backpacks), a 1.4x canon extender??, an attachment that holds batteries that attaches to the camera and has a button on it, and a bunch of filters of different sizes that variously fit the different lenses.

Okay, here are my questions (besides the obvious which is what the heck do I do with all this stuff?).

Are any of these lenses redundant? I noticed there is some overlap in their ranges. Would it be a good idea to sell one or two and trade them for something that would increase the flexibility of the camera? I have only used one of the lenses, the 180mm and it was pretty cool! In fact it was the photos I took with this single lens that clinched it for me to try to learn how to use the rest of this stuff. You can take really nice pictures of insects from about a foot away with this lens! Strangely, I didn't find much information about this lens. Everyone seemed to be raving about the canon EF 100mm macro lens, but are mum about this one. Is this lens not as good? Why isn't there information about it? So far it is my favorite (only-so far) lens.

-Hopeless amateur

[ddelallata]

They are mum about the 180 because it is sooo expensive. I envy you. I'm really interested in macro photography and would love the MP-E 65 and the ring flash :) How does 100 dlls sound? J/K Sounds like you inherited a couple of thousand dollars worth of equipment. Don't sell any of it, just learn how to use it slowly on your free time. Welcome to the forum and happy shooting.

[aggarcia]

You have a really nice equipment list. You seem to like photography, but seem lost. I would check your local camera store, community college, or adult learning center for photography classes. Start with the basics and work your way up. From your point and shoot you have learned basic composition.

There is a slight over lap on the 70-200 and 100-400, but both lenses are very good at doing different things. You should keep everything you were given and learn how to use it. Only then should you decide what to sell and keep. Good Luck.

[robvonk]

You inherited a nice equipment, thats sure.

The best thing you can do is find yourself a nice book about photography using a DSLR. I bought a general one from the National Geography books series.

It might even better to find a photography course with a teacher in your neighbourhood. That speeds up the learning curve.

It might be hard at first but don't give up too easily.

[HJMinard]

No, I don't see any redundancy in your marvelous new lens collection ... each of them fill a niche (i.e., 24-70 for general use; 70-200 for candid portraits, large wildlife and indoor or low-light sports; 100-400 for smaller or distant wildlife, motorsports, etc.). Those are merely examples of their potential usages, as you dive into this you'll discover how the lenses suit your specific needs.

My condolences for your loss ...

[hopeless amateur]

Thanks for the quick posts! I noticed that two of the lenses are macros (the MP-E 65 and the 180). I assume that since the previous owner of this equipment knew what he was doing, that they have different applications, but I'm not nuanced in what those are. I also take it an overlap of 100 mm between the 70-200 and the 100-400mm lenses isn't a big deal? I started snuffling around the forum pages--it seems like THIS place is the best surrogate for a photography teacher! I glanced at some photography books at the bookstore and I felt a bit overwhelmed with the choices and things to master-lighting, flash seemed particularly daunting. I think I will eventually pick up on the jargon too (e.g. about two minutes ago I figured out what DOF means). My first few pictures with the 180 mm were tricky. The insects were difficult to keep in focus but I suspect if I pull out the tripod and have a bit more patience my luck will improve. However, I did manage a few crystal clear photos that convinced me the effort would be worthwhile. In fact, I always wondered how photographers pulled off those amazing closeups of bugs. Now I know! I have growing appreciation for anyone that takes pictures of butterflies or flying insects. I'll probably go through each lens one at a time until I feel comfortable with it. I just hope I don't break anything with being clueless about how to use the equipment. There is this clip that looks like it attaches the flash to the 180mm. I may try to find a local photographer and see if they can do some quick identifications of some this stuff. The extra-short tripod?? is particularly weird.

[blue_max]

The above is all good advice. I would just mention that if you feel it's not for you - and it seems you didn't choose it - please make sure you take the time to at least find out what you actually have inherited. Try and price the items up and follow this forum to see what second hand values the items may go for. Canon equipment of that calibre generally holds it's value exceptionally well - maybe as much as 90% of new values.

But DON'T take it to a camera shop as they will offer you next to nothing for it.

Finally, I do hope this is the start of a great hobby for you, I am sure the previous owner would be pleased to see it bringing a little happiness.

Welcome to the forum and hope to see you here regularly - it's amazing what you can pick up if you follow the threads each day.

Graham

[Andy_T]

Amateur,

be aware that bug macros are not exactly the easiest pictures to start with :D

If you want to start with normal photography (people, landscapes, ...), the 24-70 and 70-200 will very likely be most useful.

Regarding 'offer you next to nothing' ... I don't have much experience with selling used equipment and I don't know all of the lenses you have, but IMO the equipment you described should be worth something around $ 6,000.

Best regards,
Andy

[B_uzz]

Along with reading a lot of the threads on this forum, you might be ble to hookup with some people that occasionally get together for a shoot at a zoo or other scenic spot in your area. Besides offering you help on the forum I'm sure some of them would gladly help show you how some of this great photo equipment performs when used properly. This forum has many people interested in macro photography and you might be able to find some that live close to you.

Here is an excellent review on that macro lens and macroflash:
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm

You have inherited some great equpment. Take your time to learn it's proper use and don't get frustrated too quickly before you decide if it's you 'cup of tea'.

[Bill Ng]

Ok .. here's your crash course:

There are 4 main "controls" that you have to be concerned with. Your shutter speed, your ISO, your aperature (aka F-stop), and your focal length (aka reach/range).

Shutter speed is pretty self explanatory, it's the length of time the negative (or in this case the CMOS sensor) is exposed by the shutter itself. If all other things are equal, the more light on your subject, the higher your shutter speed can be. Shutter speeds are represented as fractions of a second. So when your camera tells you that it just took a shot at "125" it really means 1/125th of a second. 4 is 1/4th of a second. Go even slower and you can get into shutter speeds of seconds. Because we are not made out of concrete, we tend to shake when holding a camera, for this reason, we tend to like to have the quickest shutter speed possible because the longer the shutter is open, the more visible shake there will be in the image which will show up as blur.

ISO stands for something ... 3 words I'm guessing ... and I have no idea what they are but that isn't important right now. In the film world, you know ISO as the speed of the film .. Kodak Gold 200, 400, or 800 for example. The 800 speed film has a negative with smaller silver nitrate cyrstals on it which "burn in" quicker than 200 speed film. This meant that for a given amount of light hitting the negative for a given amount of time ... higher ISO film could "burn" that image more quickly. This results in less need for light so a higher shutter speed (or as we're about to get to, a smaller aperature) can be used. Unfortunately, these finer grain films show up in print as more "grainy" than an equivalent lower ISO film. Your digital camera works the exact same way. Higher ISO means you can use a faster shutter or smaller aperature for a given subject ... but also means that the picture will come out more grainy. This is all you need to worry about. Better (IE faster) lenses, more light (a good flash or studio lamp), or a tripod can help you to use lower ISOs .. but in the end you'll determine what's acceptable for what you want to shoot. Taking snapshots on vacation you can get away with ISO 400 or even 800 if need be, but taking a portrait of your daughter that you want to blow up to 20"x30" and you'll want to use nothing slower than ISO 200. ISO 1600 is for when you have no other physical choice.

Aperature/F-stop is a function of your lens. The smaller the number, the larger the aperature or more light that gets through the lens. Think of a door on a space station in a sci-fi flick, one that's round and opens by expanding out from the center ... that's a rough idea of what an aperature physically looks like. As you "stop down", which means going to a smaller aperature (higher F-number), the space station door closes a little more letting in less light. "Why would you want to get less light?", you ask ... because the smaller the aperature, the greater the depth of field and in most cases, the sharper the photo (more on that later). In fact, there's a lot to talk about when it comes to depth of field so I'll also get more into that later. But the greater the depth of the field, the more that will be in focus in front and behind of your focus point.

Focal length is the "reach" of your lense. A wide-angle lense is something typically with a focal length of 40mm or less, a standard lense is typically a 50mm or so, and a telephoto is larger than that. The word "Zoom" is sometimes mistakenly used to describe a telephoto lens, when in fact a zoom lense is any lense that is not fixed in it's focal length. A fixed length lens is also referred to as a prime lense. Obviously, a prime lense is less practical in that you have to move yourself closer to or farther from your subject to get the subject framed correctly in your picture, but because a prime lense has less mechanicals inside, they are typically cheaper to manufacture, sharper, lighter (weight), and faster (again, have a larger maximum aperature) than similarly priced zoom lenses. Onto zoom lenses, you're probably familiar with the idea of zooming out to take a picture of something farther away, so I'll just go over some of the fine points of how zoom can affect aspects of your camera. Because of the mechanicals inside a zoom lens and the additional mirrors/glass that's required to get them to work, for a typical lense diameter, as I said before you'll have a smaller maximum aperature. In the case of Canon's 75-300 for example, it reads 75-300mm f/4-5.6 What this means is that at 75mm, your maximum aperature is 4 and at 300mm your maximum aperature is 5.6 ... neither of those being impressive numbers in the least. A 70-200 f/2.8 is a very fast lens for a zoom (2.8 maximum aperature throughout it's entire zoom range) but it's a much larger lense with larger glass ... it's very heavy, not something you'd want to carry around for a few hours while you hike through the woods.

Depth of Field is the distance in front of, and behind, your focus point that's still in good focus. 3 things affect your DOF, your focal length, your aperature, and your distance from your subject. The smaller your aperature (higher f-number) the greater your depth of field. The longer your focal length (higher number) the shallower your depth of field. The farther your distance from your subject, the greater your depth of field. All 3 things need to be kept in mind when determining how you want to compose an important shot. If you're using a wide angle lense and are taking a picture of a moutainous landscape off in the distance ... it won't matter much what your f-stop is because your distance from subject is so far that your depth of field is measured in hundreds of meters probably. In another scenario, if you're taking a macro photograph (a macro lense is a lense capable of an extremely short minimum focusing distance so that even really small objects can fill an entire frame and come out larger than life on print) with a Sigma 105mm Macro lense of a flower and want to include a flower bud a few inches behind it, you'll need to stop your lense down probably all the way because of the combination of long focal length and short distance to subject that this photograph requires.

Closing thoughts ... every situation is different and now that's you've been given a basic understanding of how your camera and lenses work, you have most of the tools necessary to go out and compose a subject properly. Pick one aspect of a photo that you need to work and adjust your other settings around it. If you're out shooting a motorcycle race, the fast moving bikes will require a fast shutter speed so that they don't come out blurred. Assuming you're in the stands, you're probably already a decent distance away from your subject so don't worry too much about depth of field .. adjust your aperature and ISO to acheive the fastest possible shutter speed to get good sharp photos of the bikes and riders. If you're indoors and don't want to use a flash, you'll need to use the fastest lens you have at the necessary focal length to get a decent enough shutter speed.

On necessary shutter speeds. A good general rule of thumb is this. Your shutter speed should be 1/??? equal-to or faster-than your focal length to avoid blurry photos. For example, if you're using your Canon 75-300 lense zoom'd out to 210mm, try to use a shutter speed of at least 1/250th of a second, any slower and you'll probably need a tripod. The exception to this is with an image-stabilized lense. Canon's "IS" system works wonders. It uses mirrors/motors/gyroscopes to "adjust" the image coming through the lens and really does stabilize it well. I've heard of people able to shoot at 1/60th of a second while zoomed out to 300mm and still get truly sharp photos which is amazing. Oh, and one more thing, when hand-holding, try to avoid shutter speeds slower than 1/60th of a second regardless of the focal length of the lense. Yes, some people can hand hold down to 1/30th and I saw someone claim that they held it steady at 1/4 of a second ... but that's the exception, not the norm. If I brace myself well I can hand hold at 1/15th with a wide-angle lense but keep in mind that I don't eat or drink anything with sugar and have been a competitive handgun and rifle shooter for years which helps tremendously with my steadying.

Bill in Brooklyn

[Curtis N]

You don't seem hopeless to me. You seem to have both the intelligence and the enthusiasm to climb the learning curve quickly. I think you'll enjoy this hobby immensely.

One thing you didn't mention was software. You'll need a RAW converter to get the most out of the 20D's capabilities. There are a world of choices here. One of the free ones is Digital Photo Professional which you can download from Canon's website, photoworkshop.com. I'm sure others will have more suggestions. For manipulating images, the various versions of Photoshop are nearly ubiquitous, but there are others that may meet your needs. Computer processing of digital images is a completely separate learning curve.

Have fun!

[flapsmcgee]

All of the equipment that you mention above is useless...


If you wish you can PM me and I will give you my address so as I can dispose of it for you

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[BlueTit]

You have inherited some great gear, some of it is specialist macro stuff like the MP-E65, the 180mm and the MT-24 flash. As Andythaler says you would be better starting with the 24-70 and 70-200 first, both are great lens.

The MP-E 65 is a very specialist lens that magnifies from 1X to 5X. It does not focus at infinity so there is no use pointing it down the garden and trying to get a shot with it. You can realistically only handhold a macro lens up to 1X magnification so use the 180mm. When you get to 4X or 5X with the MP-E the tip of the lens will only be a few mm from the subject, you will need it on a very steady tripod and to adjust the focus very carefully. You would use the MT-24 flash with this usually with one flash head on either side of the subject, but when you are that close adjusting the flash setting can be tricky. You can also use the MT-24 with the 180mm macro lens (95% sure of that). I have the MP-E 65 & MT-24, so if there is anything I can help you with just ask I am only starting out with them too.

So back to where I started, get used to the 24-70 and the 70-200, both great lens and read as much as you can here and other sites. Get a general photography book, there are thousands to choose from, something like “Digital Photography Basic” or “Digital Photography for Dummies”, but the most important thing to do is just take pictures and you will learn naturally what works and what doesn’t.

Enjoy.

[Volatile]

I was like you a year and a half ago, minus the inheritence. I only knew that I wanted to take better pictures, but had no idea how.

Check out some of the links in this thread: click me (http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=53846)

After a few hours you will understand f-numbers and apertures and why shutter speed priority mode is called Tv.

After a few months and a few thousand frames, you will see composition in everyday life. Best of luck and enjoy your new hobby!

[ddelallata]

Hopeless amateur, I found you some good reading for your new MP-E 65 and MR 24 flash. Enjoy
http://www.rangefindermag.com/Magazine/archives/Aug01/cannon.tml
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2914.htm

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

WOW :shock: :shock: :shock:

If your maxim in life is "If your going to do it, do it with the best equiment possible" you have started VERY well.

As you climb the learning curve you will see the use of each piece of equipment and can decide on their desireablity. DO NOT dispose of any of this equipment until you understand the application, and can make a wise, informed decision.

For photography courses, check out the local community college for evening/weekend classes.

Practice for a while on "easier" subjects. Landscape, family, pets. Get used to the camera operation.

Once captured, you will still need to process your pictures. This can be as much fun as the shooting itself. Look at digital darkroom classes and software.

Nice start to a great hobby.:D Oh yeah, the people here are really good.

Enjoy

[Digital Prophet]

Man I was expecting this to be about the comic strip. I've been gyped.

- Digital Prophet -

[DocFrankenstein]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=162616&is=USA
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=234444&is=USA
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=264304&is=USA
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=112541&is=GREY
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=183199&is=USA

This is what the lenses you have sell new. Used they sell 10-15% less.... So, take good care of them.

Welcome to the forums.

[rdenney]

All the lenses you mention are junk, and you might as well just throw them away. (Where was it that you live? When do they pick up trash in your neighborhood?)

Seriously, you have a collection of lenses most folks drool over and never hope to afford. There is no real overlap in the collection, and the only functional gap I see is at the wide-angle end. A normal lens on a 20D is a 28mm, so any number bigger than that is telephoto and any number smaller than that is wide-angle. As you can see, you are well-represented on the telephoto end.

In the future, you can consider adding something in the wide-angle range if that interests you. And you might also consider adding a decent flash, rather than depending on the nose flash, which will not be of much use.

But your first step should be to enroll in a photography course at your local community college. Even better and bigger camera stores offer photography courses for beginners.

For now, put a memory card in the camera, mount the 24-70 zoom, put the control dial on "P", the focus on "AF", the ISO on 200, the image mode on "JPEG LARGE", the metering on "Evaluative", following the instructions in the manual. Then, go take a minimum of 500 pictures. Don't use the "Picture modes"--they will coddle you and you'll never learn anything. Don't use any of the other lenses until you've made 500 exposures with the 24-70. You'll discover that the 180 macro provides high magnifications of very small things from a comfortable distance, and that the long lenses (70-200 and 100-400) are hard to hold still (which is why they have image stabilization), but don't try to figure that out at the same time as just learning which buttons to push.

(Edit: I forgot to add that eventually you'll make different selections than those I suggest above, but by then you'll know why you are making those selections, and until then my suggestions are the most versatile starting point.)

Your photo class will teach you about shutter speeds and apertures, and you'll be able to look up that information stored (it's called EXIF) with the image file using the Canon computer software that came with the camera. If an image is blurry, it's because the shutter was too slow or the aperture too wide, and you'll see which is which in that EXIF information. Then, what they tell you in the photo class will make sense.

Do not sell anything yet. It will be worth as much in six months or a year as it is now, and if you follow my advice you'll be in a much better position to judge what is useful to you at that time.

Rick "envious" Denney

[CyberDyneSystems]

Wow,. Welcome to the Forum :)


You have a very awesome kit for yourself there !

Here's what your lenses will do for you;


Don't worry about the two Macro lenses yet... they are NOT redundant.. they will both be used for rather different applications and will behave in totally different ways. But they are also both rather specialized,. (the MP65 more so)

Your "standard" lems is the 24-70mm.. you'l want to work twith this right off the bat.

Your next most usefull lens will be the 100-400mm for all kinds of long distance wildlife out door sports etc...

For Sports and other apllications where a combi nation of speed and focal range is imprtant willbe the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.
With the above three lenses you have essentially every focal range covered with the exception of ultra wide angle.. a truly thorough kit indeed!

Plus the two macros.

the 180mm Macro by the way will also function just fine as a superb 180mm telephoto. It is also one of the best "standard" Macro lenses made by anybody.

The MPE65 is very esoteric and tricky to use. Very specialized indeed. If Macro photography does not end up being of interest,. this may be the first lens you wish to sell.

Look closely at the prices of all of these lenses NEW at B&H and

Understand that Canon lenses in this high quality bracket HOLD there value EXTREMELY well. Do not sell yourself short should you decide to sell. They sell used in near mint condition for very close to new prices. Expect to take no more than 10%-15% off of B&H new prices.

[lostdoggy]

Those are some nice equipt to start with. Its worth more then a couple of Thousand. Rough estimate I would say about ten thousand. 70-200L IS along goes for about $1600.

[lostdoggy]

Oh, amatuer means that someone who enjoys a craft for the sake of enjoyment. Pro is someone who does it for a living or at least 50% of their gross income. It has no bearing as to his or her ability. Ie, an amatuer pool player (pocket pool) can best a pro pool player, but choose not to play in the pro arena.

[hopeless amateur]

I should mention how I received this equipment. I had a friend who was an art professor (mostly sculpture) but really enjoyed nature photography as well. I am a biologist that often did field identifications for him and told him where to find particular animals or plants or otherwise I described or identified different species or structures. He thought I was doing him a favor all that time, but the truth is that I loved all the weird stuff he brought in for me to look at. I watched him photograph stuff but never really paid attention to how he did it (I wish I had). In fact, he often volunteered to photograph various structures when I needed a picture taken so I never really learned. It was always better to have a photographer on hand rather than bumble through it myself. I loved his photographs and even have a few in my home hanging on the wall. He similarly really relied on me to identify things for him or dig up interesting things to photograph. It got to the point where I often looked at things not just for their scientific value but also their aesthetic value. It was a perfect symbiosis. I think he was trying to tell me something when he gave me all this equipment-which frankly I feel unworthy to receive. I'm sure there are many photographers that could make much better use of it. We had talked about putting together some field identification guides and even joked about how he should learn to identify what he is photographing and I should learn how to take a decent picture. Now I feel obligated to learn how to take a decent picture. He said I should buy better equipment if I want to take better pictures and I said then I wouldn't have a good excuse for why I STILL take bad pictures! Anyway, I guess he must have believed I'm capable of becoming a decent photographer, so I owe him a try.

[hopeless amateur]

$10,000!! Egads, and I thought the pearls before swine was just a metaphor! Now I'm even more afraid of the equipment!

[hopeless amateur]

I just wanted to thank everyone for the great advice. The forum is a fantastic resource. I guess I am a Canon person by default huh? I could tell by looking at the equipment that all of it was very well made and solidly built, but when I did some internet snooping I was absolutely shocked at the prices of some of these lenses! I will be careful and work through them one at a time since now I feel like I won some sort of photographer's lottery! I read some of the other posts and it seems that for most photographers, the general method is spending a long time choosing a lens (because they are so expensive!), and then trading in old ones and saving money for another one. It makes sense now if lenses tend to hold their value. Three of them hardly look like they have been used at all. I'm getting the sense from these posts that macro photography isn't something that you want to start off with as a new venturer into photography, but that this equipment seems to lean in that direction (with two macro lenses). I think I at least have my bearings about me now. Now if I can just find the time to play with all of this stuff. Does anyone know what you do with a tripod with no legs? It sort of superficially resembles a toilet seat with an attachment point for the tripod head. I guess you could photograph ants or moss with it maybe??? Thanks again so much for all of your help.

[Rob612]

I feel like I won some sort of photographer's lottery!

Being an inheritance, I can easily imagine that you woulf have preferred the keep your friend and not to have the equipment, so condolences seems reasonable to me.

But yes, what you have in hand is very close to one the wet dreams that every photographer has. My opinion: if you are even just a little interested in photography, keep it, use it and have fun with it. I can imagine that this what your friend intended in letting you have the stuff.

You'll always have time to sell that type of stuff, as everybody else pointed out, is very close to a cashier check.

[DavidEB]

I am a biologist

as a biologist, you might be more interested in macro and extreme macro than most others on the forum. So while everybody else might go snapping people with the 24-70 you might want to be hunched over a macro lens.

The MP-e65 will let you take high-magnification close-ups of very small things, say, focusing down to about a 5mm field of view. Great for squid axons, fly eyes, tadpole heads, etc... Not quite a microscope view but maybe similar to view you'd get with a dissecting scope. Use it with the rack-and-pinion gear thing you got to move in and out in a controlled fashion. mounted on the tripod.

[deedas]

:eek: Wow, I really have nothing constructive to say. You're one lucky guy and honestly, I'm very jealous. :o

[Barb42]

That snake like thing is a type of clamp that is used to hold flowers still. Very cool tool.

[Mudflap66]

:lol: You GO boy.:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[BlueTit]

Ah DAvid EB is right, if you are a biologist you would be more interested in the macro stuff. I dont have the 180mm lens but I have the 100mm version and it is great to use in the field. Get used to the 180mm and move on to the MP-E then. The toilet seat with the tripo mount sounds very hand, you can use it indoors with stuff your have bought home and work off a table etc. I am sure you could use it outside too, as long as you don't mind kneeling.

The MP-E 65 is a great lens, but I find it too akward to use outdoors, but I bought a copy stand the mounts the camera perpendicular to your work surface and has very fine adjustment for moving the camera up and down, with this type of lens you can focus two ways, adjust the focus ring which adjusts the magnification at the same time or set the magnification you require and move the camera to focus - I find the latter much easier and that's where the copy stand is brilliant. I'll try and post a picture of the set up with the MT-24 flash tomorrow - too tired tonight to set it all up.

Anyway, get over the value of the wonderful gift and try to start to enjoy it the way your friend meant you to and I am sure you will be taking great shots in no time.

[Bill Ng]

Does anyone know what you do with a tripod with no legs? It sort of superficially resembles a toilet seat with an attachment point for the tripod head.

It's called a monopod, helps steady a camera better than handholding. It's quicker to setup and easier to carry than a tripod.

Bill in Brooklyn

[hopeless amateur]

Thanks for the information about the clamps and the low tripod. Perhaps some of you more creative types could identify some ways to make good use of these lenses and some other equipment I have. As it happens, I do spend some quality time hunched over a dissecting scope to identify specimens (sexing various invertebrates-don't ask). I happen to have two fiber-optic light sources. Each one has two snake-head mounts each with a zoom to focus the light independently and a light source that cranks up to over 400watts or more (enough to require sunglasses or burn out your retinas-whichever you prefer). The light has a rheostat on it and can grade the light level quite finely. Can this serve as the equivalent to a perpetual flash? Are such lighting instruments used by studio photographers as well or are studio lighting setups fundamentally different? I have two stereoscopes with trinocular heads on them that I suppose could be attached to a camera body, but has had only videocameras mounted on it. Is it possible to attach one of these lenses to the trinocular head of a stereoscope and get even more magnification? I have no idea how the optics of that would work, but I suppose the clarity of the lens would then be limited by the stereoscope lens rather than the camera lens? correct? I also have two copy stands that I have never used to take pictures with (only video documenting animal movement in a decidely non-aesthetic way). Other odds and ends include numerous whole and partial microscope parts (boom-mounted and stage-mounted) that could serve as weird tripods maybe?? It may seem ludicrous talking to a bunch of photographers about a camera stand I have but have never taken pictures with, but this should give you some idea about the gap between my equipment and photography knowledge (thus the continuing appropriateness of the title of this thread). Two items that I now own but don't understand how to use are the canon extension tube EF 25 II and the 1.4x II extender. What is the difference between these two tubes? My (weak) understanding is that they change the focal distance and/or magnification? Are these only attached to macro lenses or any lenses? Or are they not appropriate with a 180mm or MP-E 65? Do they have different effects on each? I realize most people ask these questions BEFORE they purchase this stuff, but I figured, why not ask now? Can you attach these tubes to a microscope? Overwhelmed with equipment. Ideas?

[hopeless amateur]

Raw converter? I noticed that you can take (giant) images in raw format and can then manipulate them? I'm definitely not to the fine manipulation of images stage of my photography. I take a picture and say hmm, not bad or "delete". Clearly I need to become a bit more sophisticated in using what the camera has available. I look at all the manual controls you can do on this camera and it is scary. The prohibitive costs of much of this equipment I suppose serves as a nature brake to prevent people from experiencing the "equipment overload" phenomenon I now have.

[DocFrankenstein]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/index.shtml

Plow through that Photography 101

[glangston]

Roughly $7000 with just the camera and lenses.

Keep it and learn. For YOU this will be a cheap opportunity to see if you like photography.

[Curtis N]

Raw converter? I noticed that you can take (giant) images in raw format and can then manipulate them?
Not really manipulating them (that's what photoshop is for), more like adjusting a few camera settings after-the-fact.

The two most common things to do with a RAW converter is adjusting exposure (brighter or darker by up to 2 stops) and setting the white balance (telling the software the temperature of the light source so it can properly compute colors).

The ability to adjust exposure is more useful in situations where you don't have a second chance to get a shot. In your situation you could probably do fine by taking a shot, checking your histogram, adjust and shoot again.

In terms of white balance, if you're trying to document subtle color differences between, say, two similar species of creepy-crawlies, you may benefit from the ability to adjust it. You can generally set the white balance in the camera before you shoot, but I usually forget.:)

See this thread on why people shoot RAW.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=75523

[rdenney]

Raw converter? I noticed that you can take (giant) images in raw format and can then manipulate them? I'm definitely not to the fine manipulation of images stage of my photography. I take a picture and say hmm, not bad or "delete". Clearly I need to become a bit more sophisticated in using what the camera has available. I look at all the manual controls you can do on this camera and it is scary. The prohibitive costs of much of this equipment I suppose serves as a nature brake to prevent people from experiencing the "equipment overload" phenomenon I now have.

The camera gives you a good starting point for a fine print, and shooting in raw mode gives you a lot more headroom to make changes during manipulation. The biggest advantage is keeping the image in 16-bit color rather than the 8-bit color of JPEG. With JPEG, only small adjustments are possible, so you have to get it more right in the camera, and you have to accept what the camera gives you to a greater extent.

Digital cameras like the 20D compress a wide range of luminance into a narrower range of image information so that you can see it on a monitor. The pictures will look a little flat as a result. DO NOT let this bother you.

But I recommend that you stick with JPEG for the first 500 exposures. You need to learn about the basics of photography before you learn about subsequent manipulation. It takes a lot of experimentation to get past that point, and you will be better off with your strategy of taking what you get. It will teach you better technique in the camera.

Those images that look too dark or too light should lead you to press the INFO button on the display and look at the histogram. It's just a statistical distribution of luminance values. It will be one or a series of humps, with dead space on both ends for flat scenes. If the scene is really constrasty, the humps may be clipped on one end or the other. If they are clipped on the left, you've lost shadows and set the exposure compensation (look in your manual) to a plus value and try again. The humps are clipped on the right, you've blown out highlights and set the exposure compensation to a minus value and try again. But I would go out and take about 100 pictures, and then sit at home going through them to study the histograms first. Then, look at the histograms as you take your next 100 exposures. After that, you'll get a sense of what sort of scenes might cause trouble, and you'll only need to check the histogram in those conditions.

DO NOT try to do all this stuff from the first exposure. You'll be like a golfer thinking about his flying elbows, interlocking fingers, C-shaped back during follow-through, inside to outside swing, soft knees, thumbs under the grip and level club at backswing, and everything else other than THE BALL. Start out with your focus on the ball. Never take a picture in the field without giving your full attention to your subject. That's why you have to add each of these skills one at a time rather than trying to swallow all this stuff whole. Remember that most of us were pretty knowledgeable on general photography before taking up digital, and we had a head start. It's an automatic camera--use all the automation at first and then learn how to think through each of those automated process yourself one at a time, and only after being comfortable with the camera.

The point is this: You are now afraid of the camera, and you should not be. You never want to be in the position again of being afraid of the camera. Just use the settings I suggested in my previous post and go make pictures. Worry about histograms and shooting raw and how to focus in macro after the fear is gone.

Rick "who has had this beaten into his head both from art teachers and from music teachers, but who still over-analyzes his lousy golf swing" Denney

[Jon]

All of the equipment that you mention above is useless...


If you wish you can PM me and I will give you my address so as I can dispose of it for you

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I knew someone was going to say that.

When you get around to trying the 65 mm MP-E, you'll find it only focusses on things that are really close, like 1:1 to 5:1 (that's image is same size as the object to image is 5x size of the object), which is where the 180 mm stops (from infinity to 1:1). If you're taking pictures of really small subjects (the proverbial gnats eyebrow), that's what you're going to want - but it is highly specialized. And I wouldn't change a single item on your equipment list (well, I might want a 1D Mk II instead of the 20D, but . . . ), although I might add a wider-angle lens, like the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L if I had the stray $1400. But you've got plenty to work with while you find out what you like to photograph, and what you're good at photographing.

[roanjohn]

OH MY!!! I really hope you learn to use all these precious equiptments!!! Good luck!!!

And congratulations!!!

Maybe your work will appear in National Georgraphics one day ;-)
Ro1

[DavidEB]

Echo some of the above advice ... start with the easier to use 180 macro, then graduate to the super-macro. Keep your technique simple (JPG instead of RAW, avoid stuff you don't immediately see the need for) until you've developed comfort shooting.

The fixed lights might work for you with long time exposures, but they also might heat up the subject enough that air convection currents cause blur.

The three-head scope will work well, especially if it has a mirror to direct all light into a single passage. But taking shots thru a microscope or telescope presents immense technical challenge and you should wait until master the two macro lenses you have -- much easier.

Sexing invertebrates sounds good to me (I don't have to ask). Sadly, my kind of biology these days has been reduced to computer screens, teleconferences with an army of research associates, a team of statisticians, and even a few lawyers. Oh, to be taking pictures of something squishy.


kind regards,

[hopeless amateur]

One of the reasons I asked about raw files is I also inherited a copy of photoshop--something else I have never used before. I hope the learning curve is shallower than learning to use all this photography equipment, but somehow I think not. I also forgot to mention that it came with a couple of 480 (not sure of the number just yet) EX speedlite flashes?? They have little pod feet that you can set on the table and a remote. Isn't this redundant since I also have a twinlite macro flash with detachable flashes and built-in flash on the camera? How many flashes does a photographer need? What would someone do with five flashes? I found an arc shaped rod that I think can be used to attach the flashes to?? and then mount the whole thing on the tripod? The tripod has a middle post that slids out and you can extend it laterally or upside down. That seems pretty neat. The whole tripod is exceptionally strong and very light. You can also squash it down to about 4 or 5 inches above the ground. Ihave 6 GB worth of compact flash (scandisk?). How many high quality photos will that hold? This seems like overkill to me too unless you travel to Indonesia for eight weeks without time to download. Is this needed for shooting in RAW format?

[DavidEB]

I'll take your queries one at a time.

Flashes -- a single flash produces a photo with harsh shadows. When the flash is near the camera the image looks flat, with glare and unpleasant shadows. Multiple EX-type flashes used in wireless master-slave setup can control shadows and produce even lighting. The macro twinlight flash does this when you're inches away from the subject (with standard flashes or on-camera flash the lens would cast a shadow). Multiple flash setups is one of those very complex topics that you shouldn't worry about much until comfortable with basics of rest of equipment, and master of single-flash shots. To get started, I suggest using the on-camera flash or one EX flash mounted on the camera hot-shoe in auto mode for ordinary photos (bouncing flash off ceiling is a good easy technique) and the twinlight for macros (with the ring part mounted on the lens, and the controller on the hotshoe). Anything that says E-TTL or ETTL II will produce good exposure automatically.

Fancy flash mountings, arc-shaped rods, brackets, little pod feet, etc... These are useful for multi-flash setups and are also useful for getting more distance between the camera and the flash which helps control the shadows. Use the flash mounted on the camera until you see the need for this stuff. Look at the shadows you get in your photos and decide if you need to reposition your flash. For macros, just use the ring-mounted twinflash in auto mode.

RAW -- there are RAW fanatics out here. I use RAW for difficult shots, but JPG most of the time and it's OK. I'll get flamed for this advice from the RAW fanatics, but I suggest you put off RAW until rest of photography makes sense. To get benefit out of RAW you have to really understand exposure, white balance and contrast, but you won't have that knowledge until you've shot a thousand or so photos in JPG and learned from them.

Photoshop -- a fantastic program with a steep learning curve. Fortunately the number of things you really ought to be able to do in adobe to make your photos OK is small - crop, levels (adjust exposure), unsharp mask, and you can do all these on JPGs. There are tutorials on the web, especially at luminous-landscape. My opinion only -- you'll get more learning initially out of time spent with the camera than with time spent in photoshop.

Tripod -- the tripod you got sounds just right for field work, lets you get up close to the little gastropods.

CF cards -- no such thing as too much. The way I get one good shot is to take a few dozen with varying settings, and then later pick the best. This is the greatest thing about digital; with film cameras that approach was too expensive. Put you camera in large JPG mode (set in the main menu) and you'll get about 200 shots per gigabyte. 6 gig might get you thru a week. Your eight week indonesia trip will probably require portable storage like an iPod, x-drive, epson 2000, with 40 gig or more.


hope this helps. am in boring teleconference discussing pharmacokinetics at present, would rather be recording evoked potentials in neurons, or photographing neurons.

[DavidEB]

have a look at this thread on using a 150mm macro lens. Nice picture of how to set up a standard flash to avoid lens shadows. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72569

[hopeless amateur]

Hi again. Thanks for all the sound advice for picture taking. I've been taking a bunch of pictures (mostly very very bad ones). The first skill I learned was the picture erase function on the 20D! I feel like someone who just learned how to dog paddle and then was chosen as an alternate for swimming in the olympics. I've started working with the MP-E 65mm lens and the MT-EX 24 flash. I know, I know, everyone told me to stay away from this lens until I learned to use the other "normal-people" lenses. Like a little kid, if you say "stay away from that lens, you'll just get frustrated", I thought, hmm. there must be something really cool about it! So now I'm neck deep in it! Normally I would post this under macro, but it is easier to ask my insanely dumb questions in this thread than have other readers wonder why someone who doesn't understand something as basic as setting an f-stop has an MP-E 65mm lens and a 20D. So anyway, my naive question is how do you set the f-stop in fully manual mode with a 20D (the only mode that really works with this lens)? I suppose this makes perfect sense for my completely inverted introduction to photography. I found myself ironically flipping to the "advanced features" section of the manual and couldn't figure out how to set the aperature. I can set it in aperture priority mode, but I can't seem to figure out how to dial down to f-16 in fully manual with the 20D since I think this might increase my depth of field at 3, 4, and 5x magnification. It changes only the shutter speed whenever I try it. Any advice you may have would be appreciated.

By the way, as an update, I've now tried out all the lenses I have-the 100-400mm IS L and 70-200mm IS L, the 24-70mm L, the 180mm L macro, and of course the MP-E 65 (I still haven't touched the teleconverter, extension tubes, polarizing filters, UV, neutral density filters and other stuff yet-but I'm sure I'll be asking more questions when I do). My favorite lens however is definitely the 65mm MP-E. I've taken about 1500 pictures in the last week or two and about 1200 of them are with the MP-E. The 180mm macro is quite nice too. Even I can take decent pictures with that lens! It took me a couple of hours to fully understand how this gitzo explorer and hydraulic ball head work too (of course an instruction manual would have helped here but I'm hoping you fine folks on this forum can be a suitable substitute since the manuals are lacking and most of this camera equipment doesn't exist at your local "ritz camera store").

Although the MP-E takes fantastic photos, the depth of field is limiting. Any ideas how to squeeze more depth of field out of the lens? (assuming a lower f stop would work and that I can learn to set it in manual mode?!) One strategy I've tried is to take a few pictures in burst mode as I lean forward. The subsequent pictures have different parts of the subject that are out of focus. I then tried cutting and pasting these different parts in photoshop into a composite image that is completely in focus. I'm convinced the idea is sound, but my photoshop skills are lacking (I've only had photoshop for a couple of weeks). I even tried photomerge and photostitch. Sometimes it almost works! Has anyone tried this technique or know how to do it? Most of my current photos are an exercise in what DOESN'T work (e.g. hmm, what happens if I take a 3x magnification of a tephritid fly and dial the shutter speed to 500 and ISO of 800).

[DavidEB]

I love enthusiasm.

f-stop question -- I suspect the answer is simple, though if you've already thought of this then please forgive if I'm talking down. In M mode the dial next to the shutter release controls shutter speed, and the big wheel on the back of the camera controls aperature.

depth-of-field -- This link might be useful. http://bobatkins.com/photography/technical/dofcalc.html To use a small aperature you will benefit from flash.

Your idea about a series of shots stitched together is pretty interesting, but might require a steady hand. Try it on the tripod turning the focus ring, or try it with the macro focusing rail which will give you control over position and focus. Either way, rock-solid camera positioning will be key. In photoshop, when you make your panorama, click "keep as layers" and then you can erase the out-of-focus parts by hand. Sort the layers manually, near on top.

A simpler method of controlling DOF is to change the view angle to perpendicular to the subject.

A final method is a tilt-shift lens but you didn't mention having one of those in your kit and they're way expensive and very complex to use -- too much for me.

Flash for close-ups --- I take my close-up shots with a standard telephoto lens and extension tubes, being to cheap to buy a dedicated macro lens. Works OK. One hurdle I solved the cheap way is flash support -- how to mount the flash to illuminate something 4" away from the lens without lens shadows. I cobbled a homemade bracket together out of aluminum bar stock and discarded flash shoe mounts, it holds my two flashes near the front of the lens. You can probably achieve that effect either with the ring flash or with the arc-shaped metal rods, which are flash brackets. They are probably this, or something like it; the web link will give you an idea how to assemble and use.

http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/flash/index.html

Gitzo explorer and ball head -- I have exactly that. The gitzo comes with a useless manual, and my ball head with even less.

Great to hear from you again, glad it's working out well. If you have shots of general interest, by all means post them; if your shots are biology esoterica, send me a private message or email as I'd love to see them.

kind regards,

[22littlereasons]

Congratulations! I'm laying down a tarp to catch the drool!

[CyberPet]

I haven't read through this thread completely, so I'm not sure this sugggestion has been given to you or not: PLAY AROUND!!!!!

Honestly, you have been fortunate enough to get a great equpiment, and you seem curious about it. Well, the digital film is free, you have nothing to worry about. Just play around with your equipment, use every nob and wheel and play around. If you feel insecure, use the P-mode to get some shots that will turn out good, just plop any lens on and point and shoot. The camera will do most of the work for you. Next you play with the different lenses, see what they do and you'll soon find out when you need this and that lens. And when you feel you know the camera fairly well, so you dare to change the ISO and even the aperture, you can start playing in the Av and Tv modes.

You have many fun years ahead of you and you will eventually grow into this equpiment. It's not a small point-and-shoot, but it's a great tool and I think you'll find that your photography will improve pretty quickly.

So HAVE FUN!!!!!!! :D

[Rob612]

And keep in mind that beside stopping down, there's basically nothing else you can do to increase DOF. When you talk macro, especially with a larger-than-lifesize lens like the MP-E 65, DOF is always an issue and can be measured in millimiters. Stopping down helps, sure, but still we are talking millimeters.

[sjprg]

AND!! Don't let anyone talk you out of any of these lenses no matter what they say. Your friend obviosly knew what he was about and did a very careful selection of lenses. As time progresses the camera bodies and technology may change, but the lenses remain the mainstay of your photography.

Here is a link to the pro forum. A little lurking there will give you a lot more info.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/postlist.php?Cat=0&Board=UBB8

And a course on flash.
http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/

Article on insect photography.
http://www.richard-seaman.com/Me/Photography/Insects/index.html
http://www.nzmacro.50megs.com/

[colinb53]

Please, please accept my sincere apologies if I am mistaken, but call me cynical if you like, but there's something about this post that worries me, just doesn't ring true. Total amatuer to photography, 'inherited' some of the best photographic equipment money can buy, joined the forums a month ago. Nah, its probably me being stricken with total jealousy:confused:

[Michaelmjc]

Holy crap, lucky! thats some sweet equipment man, the only overlap is 70-200, and the 100-400. But dont sell it, keep it all. except if you wanna give me it ;)

Good luck.

[hopeless amateur]

Thank you all for your very helpful comments. I'll apologize for my literary stream of consciousness below-my questions and experiences are flooding my brain. It has been truly daunting wading through the pile (yes it really is a large pile) of photographic stuff. I have some pictures but I don't know how to post them here. If anyone can give me pointers on that, I'll be glad to inflict my photographic skills on everyone....assuming you like very cute charismatic arthropods. I noticed some people post directly into their reply while others provide links to gallery pages. How does that work? A few of the pictures I took actually look good (sort of). My criteria for what constitutes "good" is changing rapidly however. I suspect my "best" photos so far will be my eraseables a year from now (or even a week from now). My first two days of taking pictures I kept everything-if for no other reason than to know what to avoid doing but also because even the crappy images with this camera are better than what I was taking before...WAY better. I used my 100-400mm lens TWICE before I realized it was a PULL-OUT zoom lens! Then the third time was an aha moment (actually, more like a DOH!!--moron! moment). I guess it was a 200mm prime lens for two days and has since been magically converted to a zoom! As you can see, the pearls before swine post still applies! I have been reading about equipment like crazy. Luckily I haven't broken anything before I figured out how it works yet although I managed to mess with the diopter (is that right?) little dial near the view finder? I had blurry images for a while before I figured out that I accidentally spun that around. I'm still not sure if it is back to where it was. My only minor irritation (besides not knowing what I'm doing!) is that I'm left handed and I can't quite figure out how to hold on to the camera. I have the vertical grip but I want to inverse everything to take a picture and the button isn't where I want it to be. Do they make these things for lefties? Anyway, I've been playing with the 180mm macro over the last two days. It is super easy to use compared to the MP-E. I can even use autofocus in macro. I've just discovered the power of the red squares indicating what is in focus about an hour ago. Wow! that's way easier than the MP-E (or can you do this with the MP-E too but I just haven't figured out how??). My wife hasn't seen me without a camera around my neck for over a week now. She asked me to try to take a picture of something bigger than a gnat's bum so I took some obligatory squirrel pictures at 400mm-they have evil metallic eye shine low light? (not red eyes-- they're not satanic after all, more cyborg-esque). Is this due to a wimpy flash and light levels that are too low?

Some of the images I take show up black. Why is this? Is it that the flash can't keep up in burst mode? I'm always deleting these. Stay tuned for more moron questions and a deep sense of awe. I've been really playing with photoshop. So far I've mastered the ability to totally screw up a barely servicable photo. I'm hoping that at some point, photoshop may actually IMPROVE the quality of the images AFTER I've worked on them. I'm still a bit dense about how the layers work in photoshop, but I'll try to save the images as those to improve depth of field.

I now see the completely different applications of having "redundant" lens. At first I thought the MP-E and 180mm macro were sort of redundant since they both went to 1:1. Now I know better. The 180mm is sort of like a telephoto for bugs. I had to stand about 3.5 feet away from a scarab beetle to get a good picture. The MP-E is always in danger of crushing the subject. I can also use the autofocus on the 180. I've been using everything in manual mode. I still don't quite get the shutter-speed thing, but it seems that the magic formula is around 150-250 shutter speed and a 16 f stop outdoors??? I only took one or two pictures with the 24-70mm lens. It seems like a nice lens, but I guess the range of images on it seem like that of most point-and-shoot so I'm less awestruck by it and am too much of an amateur to appreciate the difference in image quality. I took a great picture of a fly on squirrel poop-up close and personal. You haven't lived until you have seen a fly with a poo-eating grin on its face.

The macro-twin lite is great. I've completely avoided all the buttons on the LCD for it that say C.Fn, Mode, Lamp, Ratio, etc. I just let the ETTL show up and take pictures. I'm pretty much still really afraid of lighting stuff. It does look like it could calculate escrow or maybe convert furlongs into cubits. Any recommendations how to safely store all this gear? Is it OK to keep it in the backpack or should I buy something more hard-cased? I've posted most of the equipment I have in my signature in case you see anything I have that can help me. I also have polarizers that fit every lens, haze filters that fit every lens, some plamps and extensions for the plamps and some round light reflectors of various sizes that are bronze/gold on one side and white on the other. Any ideas how to use those?

[DavidEB]

Hey, hopeless...

posting images -- This link (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=51022) will help you figure out how to post directly. In photoshop, from the menu, file --> save for web, ensure size no bigger than 800 any direction and adjust JPG quality down so image <= 100k bytes. In forum, click "create new thread" and use "manage attachments" to post. I post my images (www.pbase.com/davideb) on pbase (www.pbase.com) which is only about $20 US per year and is easy.

setting exposure -- suggest use P mode for a while, watch what settings camera picks.

black images - you called it, flash didn't recycle on second shutter release. be thankful it's digital, mistakes are cheap.

flash -- KISS. flash can get really complex really fast. The clamps and reflectors you have mostly relate to flash. Suggest you just use basic flash in E-TTL (automatic) until you've got it figured out. Only fancy thing you might want to work on is how to put the macro flash in position so the lens doesn't cast shadow. That's what the clamps are for. See link in prior post to really right stuff, for idea of how it should work.

photoshop -- Scott Kelby's book. The less you do to an image, the better. All most photos need is adjust levels and filter --> unsharp mask (set to 100%, radius 1, threshold 1 for starters), and a little crop. You'll learn more from time with the camera than with time on photoshop.

haze filters -- real optics afficionados may disagree, but I suggest leave one of these on every lens at all times. They are cheap, lenses are expensive. I've replaced a couple of filters over the years but never replaced a lens.

choice of subjects - invertebrates are OK but I prefer things with myelin.

[hopeless amateur]

David--

You sound like a schwann cell afficionado. They are a real treat to keep in primary cell culture aren't they?

[DavidEB]

never cultured 'em. fresh slices more my thing. long time ago, now a desk jockey.