DSLRUsers.com

I promised to take some pics with the Sigma 180mm f/3.5 Macro in this post but I have not really had any macro oppertunities so i thought I would post some of my dodgy pics from today (the 180mm was the only long lens I was carrying today).





I really wish I could get more practice with this sort of photography. Changing conditions (sun and clouds) made exposure vary a fair but unfortunately and the 180 proved to be a tad slow to AF (even with the limiter on)...wish I had brought the 70-200VR instead.

For good measure...the only Macro shot I have taken with the Sigma recently...once again not a great shot, SB-600 used off camera to the left to keep shutter speed decent...lens was on monopod.

BUMP!!....no comments at all???

Cameron
Next time....try and use attractive models!
The macro looks sharp....but from a monopod?? Macros should always be done from a tripod....but then you knew that.

The pretty girls are well done. But even if they weren't....who would care?

I'll make a comment. As for the quality of the images, the 180 seems to do a good job at that length. The first images have distracting backgrounds or in the case of the first of the 'Rio' dancer, the foreground head is annoying which is unfortunate as the dancer is very photogenic.

The macro shows just how good this lens is at macro work. The detail captured on the 'love balls' is excellent and shows what this lens is designed for.

Matt K. wrote:Cameron
Next time....try and use attractive models!
The macro looks sharp....but from a monopod?? Macros should always be done from a tripod....but then you knew that.

The pretty girls are well done. But even if they weren't....who would care?

Thanks Matt, I'll try to find some more attractive models next time....want to come and give me a hand judging???

A tripod? What is that????

Killakoala wrote:I'll make a comment. As for the quality of the images, the 180 seems to do a good job at that length. The first images have distracting backgrounds or in the case of the first of the 'Rio' dancer, the foreground head is annoying which is unfortunate as the dancer is very photogenic.

The macro shows just how good this lens is at macro work. The detail captured on the 'love balls' is excellent and shows what this lens is designed for.

Thanks Steve, I do like what the 180 can do as a telephoto but it would really have to focus a lot faster to be used like this. These are pretty opportunistic shots, apologies about the background in these, I'll have to try to get better positioning in the future. I actually found that there was a pretty low keeper rate, f/3.5 feels a lot slower than f/2.8 (or am I just imagining that???)

Sadly the bracelet (love balls) was lost a few days after this macro was taken. When the 180 is shut down a few stops it really shines as a macro (for its price it better!).

Does anyone have any tips for shooting dancers and the like at a street festival??

Good luck Cameron, you will need it. I found this kind of street photography difficult with a long lens. The people are irritating for in most cases they are not aware you are taking a photograph, or worse they don't care. I advise you to use a shorter (a fast 50mm lens) and elbow inch by inch with your camera, tripod/monopod and a rather large prickly cactus close to your subject. The later will ensure people keep their distance.
However, if you choose to disregard the previous advice, then include the crowd but make the subject more prominent e.g. blur the unwanted bits as much as you can or turn every thing except the main subject into monocrome or isolate the subject and change the background. But trust me the cactus idea is easier and it will give you more satisfaction.

I guess I go back to using the small fast lens for crowd work...cactus eh???

Cameron, you are really pushing boundaries with using a Macro for street/event type of photography!

What event is this? I can't really link the exotic costumes with an apparent beauty pageant....

Perhaps something like a 28-300 or a 18-200 maybe useful for this sort of photography unless you had primo position.

3.5 would be two thirds slower than the 2.8 Maybe you were just affected by the focus rather than aperture when it was fairly sunny...

surenj wrote:Cameron, you are really pushing boundaries with using a Macro for street/event type of photography!

What event is this? I can't really link the exotic costumes with an apparent beauty pageant....

Perhaps something like a 28-300 or a 18-200 maybe useful for this sort of photography unless you had primo position.

3.5 would be two thirds slower than the 2.8 Maybe you were just affected by the focus rather than aperture when it was fairly sunny...

This was two actual events...the first (the dancer) was at the "Ritmo Brazilian Festival" @ Darling Harbour and the other shots were from a fashion show that I stumbled upon in the Rocks.

I actually bought the Sigma EX DG APO 180mm f/3.5 Macro HSM as I intended to use it as a telephoto as I didnt intend to purchase the 70-200VR so quickly. This was the sole reason that I purchased the big Sigma over the Tamron which I have used and quite liked. Granted that it is pushing the boundaries a fair bit to be used for street/event photography I have managed to get some decent shots with it. I dont like any of the superzooms (18-200/18-250/18-270/28-200/28-300) as I would prefer to get something nicer with the money. Yep the AF is painfully slow with the big 180 Sigma but it would be slower again if I had the Big Tamron 180, these are macros at the end of the day.

Yep 3.5 is only 2/3rds of a stop slower...but when your fighting for shutterspeed (ie when I was shooting that macro shot) you really feel it...I noticed it when I had that 10-17 Fisheye as well (3.5-4.5 vs 2.8 for almost all my other lenses) but i am sure I will get used to it (once that fisheye comes back).

aim54x wrote:Yep 3.5 is only 2/3rds of a stop slower...but when your fighting for shutterspeed (ie when I was shooting that macro shot) you really feel it...I noticed it when I had that 10-17 Fisheye as well (3.5-4.5 vs 2.8 for almost all my other lenses) but i am sure I will get used to it (once that fisheye comes back).

Cameron, I don't understand what you are saying here. How is the maximum aperture of your lens a factor when you are shooting at f8 as you have done in your macro shot? Unless you mean that the focus was slow because the maximum aperture was 3.5 vs 2.8?

whats wrong in using macro for non small subjects?

i also using my macro lens to take normal shots recently. could anyone please kindly comment on the this topic?

now i see the power of f2.8 lens and the lens bugs is biting me really bad...

rex wrote:whats wrong in using macro for non small subjects?

Depends upon the lens, but as a general comment, nothing.

The Tamron 90 is an excellent portrait lens, and a kick arse macro, at a really great value price.

rex wrote:whats wrong in using macro for non small subjects?

Nothing. Use the lens that gives you the result you like.
However, a macro has a much longer travel from closest focus to furthest focus, so, all other things being equal, it will be slower to get a focus lock as the motor needs to drive the focusing elements further.
Also, the out of focus areas may look different as the lens is designed for a different purpose. Again, if you like the result, use it.

Nice shots Cam, I would have liked to see some eye contact but can understand its hard to get in possie when there are lotsa peeps about. The first one would have a cracker i reckon if it was a bit wider or a bit tighter, but seeing there is dudes head in way that might not have been possible, great colours and real mardi gras feel to it!

The lady in the second looks like shes got more of a 5 o'clock shadow then me!

wish I had brought the 70-200VR instead

yes..yes you should be shot for forgetting that

biggerry wrote:

aim54x wrote: wish I had brought the 70-200VR instead

yes..yes you should be shot for forgetting that

No need to go that far!
I'll just confiscate that unloved lens

biggerry wrote:

wish I had brought the 70-200VR instead

yes..yes you should be shot for forgetting that

With a 70-300 G!

It is a bit of a problem....yes I should be shot for not having the 70-200VR with me (I have a nasty habit of doing that) but please can I say I deserve better than the 70-300G.....hows about that old 100-300 of Gerrys??

Greg are you offering to purchase that 70-200VR off me?

offering to purchase that 70-200VR off me?

lol, you know where to head if your looking to offload this bad boy!

70-300G.....hows about that old 100-300 of Gerrys??

sacrilege! that lens is my staple built like a baseball bat so ya probably use it as a weapon..

Use the lens that gives you the result you like

Mr Darcy wrote:a macro has a much longer travel from closest focus to furthest focus, so, all other things being equal, it will be slower to get a focus lock as the motor needs to drive the focusing elements further.

thats a biggie on lenses wo focus limiter. anyway since im beyond hyperfocal distance the focus ring stays on infinity range.

these on nikkor 105mm VR


cropped




cropped

Just as a matter of curiosity, which camera did you use? It must have a big sensor to allow you such dramatic cropping without pixilation.

Gary
Tamron 90mm....what a classic for portraits and close ups! Oh bring back those days !!!
Cameron..a tripod is a 3 legged monopod.

holy heck - these are nice crops! looks like I need to spend more money!!!!!!!!!!!

rex wrote:

Mr Darcy wrote:a macro has a much longer travel from closest focus to furthest focus, so, all other things being equal, it will be slower to get a focus lock as the motor needs to drive the focusing elements further.

thats a biggie on lenses wo focus limiter. anyway since im beyond hyperfocal distance the focus ring stays on infinity range.

these on nikkor 105mm VR


cropped




cropped

Matt. K wrote:Gary
Tamron 90mm....what a classic for portraits and close ups! Oh bring back those days !!!
Cameron..a tripod is a 3 legged monopod.

Tamron 90mm...such a good lens and so cheap (overseas)!!!

Thanks Matt...I have a few of those three legged monopods...always was wondering what they were called...TRI-POD very sensible!

Rex, I am also interested as to what camera your using!

aim54x wrote:Rex, I am also interested as to what camera your using!

nikon D80.
nikkor 105mm macro VR
ISO:100

more details on the exif

Thank you, Rex. It did not occur to me to look at the exif. I thought you might have been using a full sensor camera to be able to make such a cropping without loosing detail.