Some Shots with The Sigma 105
May 26, 2014 00:15:44 #
Took delivery of my lens on Thursday and went out shooting on Saturday. Sadly it was a frustrating day. I just couldn't get the diffuser dialed in. Lens is a longer then the one I use the diffuser on. I couldn't get it to rest on the end of the lens properly and it kept sagging in front of the lens. Not to be dissuaded I spent Saturday evening making a new diffuser. I took the rig out today and had much better results. Typical setup and parameters with 92mm of tubes. I can't wait to go out tomorrow morning.
May 26, 2014 00:32:50 #
William: Looks pretty good to me. I'm constantly redesigning too. I've been out of action for three weeks-- and now my computer won't allow me to post pictures. Yikes!
May 26, 2014 01:00:56 #
May 26, 2014 01:13:35 #
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
Thank you Allen. Out of action for 3 weeks, that blows. Hope you get the computer up and running, I'd like to see some of your pictures.William: Looks pretty good to me. I'm constantly redesigning too. I've been out of action for three weeks-- and now my computer won't allow me to post pictures. Yikes!
May 26, 2014 01:18:39 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
Thanks Douglass - I have been looking for these bees since I first started macro. When I saw it this morning I was so excited. It was almost like shooting macro for the first time. This one didn't like my flash. One shot and poof the sleeping bee was gone. Not sure about the hatchlings/eggs. Definitely a true bug. A revisit to the site in a couple weeks should give me a better idea what they are.Awesome bee! Love the hatching eggs. Shield bugs?
May 26, 2014 15:10:55 #
May 26, 2014 17:06:34 #
The diffusion on the Metallic beetles look dial in, unless you pulled from the shadows.. Can't get much better than that. Lens looks to working great as well, nice choice.
May 27, 2014 00:57:48 #
tinusbum wrote:
Thank's Tom, yes my intial impression is it's a fine lens. Nice not having to lug the 3.5lb 180 when I want a little distance from the subject. I was surprised, some internal focus hocus-pocus going on. I'm getting 2:1 with 72mm of tubes and when I focus to infinity around 1:1.5. That's good magnification range for the field.nice shots,the 105 is working great
May 27, 2014 01:01:30 #
fstop22 wrote:
Thanks Martin, I thought so as well. I've been working on my diffuser and testing on ladybugs all spring just so I can shoot the metallic beetles that will be all over the bayou in a month or so. Didn't pull anything from the shadows but I did increase exposure a smidgen. I should have cocked the diffuser to the right.The diffusion on the Metallic beetles look dial in, unless you pulled from the shadows.. Can't get much better than that. Lens looks to working great as well, nice choice.
May 27, 2014 01:56:32 #
The new lens seems to be serving you well. These look great :thumbup:
What's your working distance with 72mm of tubes?
What's your working distance with 72mm of tubes?
May 27, 2014 11:13:09 #
Neat pics. I never thought of putting extension tubes (if I had them) onto a macro lens. Does that mean you have to be physically closer to the subject to take a pic or does it let you be farther away (as I would want to be for a bee) or neither? I might put a diffuser on my birthday wish list.
May 27, 2014 13:39:49 #
planepics wrote:
Extension tubes were actually designed to be used with macro lenses. The first Nikkor 55-mm macro lens required a dedicated tube to reach 1:1 mag. Neat pics. I never thought of putting extension tubes (if I had them) onto a macro lens. Does that mean you have to be physically closer to the subject to take a picture?
Now true macro lenses capture 1:1 stand-alone, but can reach higher mag with extension tubes. Using tubes ALWAYS shortens Working Distance.
Nikkor 55-mm macro + 27.5-mm M2 tube1
May 27, 2014 19:37:47 #
Flyextreme wrote:
Thanks Bill - performed some working distance and magnification shots today and here's what I came up with:What's your working distance with 72mm of tubes?
No tubes at MFD = working distance 140mm (5.5" ) / magnification 1.1:1
72mm Tubes at MFD = working distance 103mm (4" ) / magnification 2.1:1
72mm Tubes Focused to Infinity = working distance 172mm (6.7" ) / magnification .67:1
Quite spacious compared to the MP-E 65 - 102mm (4" ) at 1:1 and 63mm (2.5" ) at 2:1. When I first started using the lens I found I was instinctively pushing into the subject too much. I find it odd that the Sigma is actually a smidgen greater than 1:1 at MFD with no tubes. Every other lens I've measured is dead on 1:1. What is the magnification of your lens at MFD?
May 27, 2014 20:23:14 #
Canon EOS 5D Mark III has a 36 mm x 24mm sensor: http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#Specifications
Math confirmation:
36/33.8 = 1.07:1 magnification (1.07x life-size)
36/17.5 = 2.06:1 magnification (2.06x life-size)
36/53.7 = 0.67:1 = 1:1.5 mag (2/3x life-size)
Math confirmation:
36/33.8 = 1.07:1 magnification (1.07x life-size)
36/17.5 = 2.06:1 magnification (2.06x life-size)
36/53.7 = 0.67:1 = 1:1.5 mag (2/3x life-size)
May 27, 2014 22:46:54 #
I lost again...I entered a print pic I took with my relatively new 105 and it was cut before the places were chosen. I haven't placed in ANY print comp with my camera club; only digital, and those were like 3rd or 4th place. It seems like even though there are lots of pics entered each competition, the same group of people seem to win all the prizes (a business card size placard). I think I'll take a photography class at my local college. BTW, our judge tonight is a retired art and photography teacher for one of the colleges. And no judge knows who shot what pic and only at the end are the winners announced. The only "real" success I've had is a couple of winning plane pics in e-publications on the web. I've only had the 105 for a couple months so maybe I just don't know how to use it...still, I might just put the pic on my wall. I like it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.