New 35mm Macro

[Nick D]

Got this lens 1 day before contest ended. i didn't get to post any in contest, Ric your lucky, just kidding, but I thought I'd post a few images with hopes of maybe some helpful tips or what maybe you like or don't like about images. I'm still learning, so I'm open for suggestions.







I'll thank you now for your time and help

[Ric]

So many views and yet no one has anything to say about these photos? These photos were done by a newbie to the Macro World and he would love to hear what different people have to say.

I made comments on all of his Macro pictures which are here http://flickr.com/photos/shutterbug224/.....

[Nick D]

And again I thank you for your helpful comments.

Believe me, I know i need help. So to all, don't be afraid that I may get hurt feelings if you "hammer" me. I've said it in other threads here I'm trying to learn photography not just take a picture,  what makes an photo work, what doesn't and apply that to my images.

[leelf62]

Nick,
Focus is extremely important in macro.  It is recommended that you use manual focus.  The first photo is a little out of focus (unless you were going for a "soft" look.  The diamond was great...I could see facets.  The coin is good and in focus.  Next, what is your goal with the image....entertain, laugh, the "wow" factor, color, texture, etc.  Background is also important.  It shows up, even if you don't want it to!!  I just jotted down a few thoughts from the top of my head.  Keep at it.  Take LOTS of macros.  Mix it up a bit.  AND, don't be afraid!!  Take risks!!
Lee

[jefg99]

Nick, I posted my comments on Flickr. I also am a macro newbie of sorts, and while my camera has a manual focus and I've gotten a macro attachment, I'm a long way from getting the results I want. I think it comes down to practice and experimenting (and, of course, time).

Good start!

[Nick D]

Thanks Lee, Thanks Jeff.  No Lee I wasn't trying for any effect with soft focus.Using my eye and moving camera in and out to get focus.  One of my concerns is my eye sight seems to be changing faster than I can get glasses/contacts and the ability to manually focus and object. i may post other images in future using manual focus to determine if I have the ability to get a sharp image.

now that said, I do notice I tend to like a softer touch to images and not sure if I'm focusing to my taste or not, but for here I'm looking for critiques like such to make me aware of what I am doing wrong. As a matter of fact, my main goal is to get what I'm macro shooting in focus. The other is composition and Ric gave me some real helpful points there

I've should have taken up an easier hobby like cave digging or perhaps dentistry. Now that would be funny, going blind and drilling  someone's teeth. Not to be rude to anyone who may be a dentist or involved in dentistry. I just see humor in odd places.

[Yammer77]

Nick,
I almost bought that lens, but was toying with the idea of the 50mm
If you have the 12-60mm that acts as a great macro substitute as well.
The last one is my favorite.
The 2nd one seems a bit busy with the ring.  Maybe some effect like what the lensbaby does would work.
Blur everything except the diamond.
First one seems out of focus.


I reviewed them in reverse, but not bad at all first time out.
The 35mm you have to be REALLY CLOSE....so lets see some bug shots!!!

[Nick D]

thank you Anthony for your comments.

I bought that lens because May was photo month. olympus to honor that was giving extra dicounts to its employees and I out that I have a relative that works for a company that is a subsidiery for oly and got this great discount on the lens. I could have gone with 50mm f2 and was reallllllllllllllly tempted to get 50-200 swd, but reality hit and the 35 is all i could afford at this moment.

I did shoot a bug early this morning and it is posted on my flickr site (I know how much you love flickr, especially that white background). Though the beetle may not have been the best, what really impressed me was that 1 image was at 800 iso and the other 2 at 1600 and the noise, or lack there of. For all its touting I am very disappointed with my 12-60 in low light and higher iso settings. It Seems to get an awful lot of banding and the 70-300 is just too slow and hunts allot in low light. I was starting to get very diappointed with oly and 800 and above. Oly gets a rap for high iso noise with smaller sensor and I believe from what I've experienced rightly so. This little piece of glass puts some faith back in oly for me.

[Yammer77]

when you use the 50-200mm you will realize the full potential of the oly system.

[Nick D]

Anthony, Once again if you look on my flickr site, the portrait images of our president were taken with the 50-200 lens you let me use that night. And I do agree it is a wonderful piece of glass. Probably my best results that night were with that glass. thanks again for letting me borrow it. If I may lament, in hind sight I should have gone with 14-54 and 50-200 instead of 12-60. At that time with rebates, the 2 were not that much more than the 12-60.

Don't get me wrong, the 12-60 takes some wonderful shots, and I love the range 12-60 or 24-120 efd. and at lower ISOs very sharp. My only issue is at the higher iso settings. Hope the 50-200 will be better for that.

[leelf62]

I love my 14-54!!  Nick, see what you can do to get one.  It's 2.8 and fast.   I must save up for the 50-200 (2.8 too).  I bought a used 40-150 (3. too slow.  I've been checking on ebay and craigslist and potn (which is really a Canonish site), but no deals as good as Scott's deal.  If anyone sees one, please let me know.  My stop gap will be a 1.4x teleconverter.  2.0 are hard to get now.

[Yammer77]

I really haven't seen that much improvement when I tried the 14-54.
The lens that is great is the 11-22mm tack sharp.

[Nick D]

Lee, anthony

14-54 probably not on my list, not for a long time already having the 12-60. The 11-22 interests me allot as the 50 f2 and the 50-200 swd. the other u
that said I would love those dream lenses 14-35 , 35-100, 90-250, 150 & 300 mm lenses. all I need will be ~$19,000 and one wild story to justify it to my wife. She's already soooooo good to me and supportive of this hobby

Lee, i though you were a cannon user? now I'm getting confused who is who

[Yammer77]

the best BY FAR is the 11-22.

[Nick D]

I can't say. I've heard some awesome stuff about the 14-35 f2 at 4/3 photo web site. But at $2,200 to $2,500 its way out of my league. The 11-22 is weather sealed, isn't it?