are these considered closeups
Feb 13, 2013 13:24:30 #
Feb 13, 2013 13:31:02 #
Feb 13, 2013 13:36:35 #
Bret wrote:
There you go....yes close-ups and nice ones at that...thanks for posting.
Thanks Bret
Feb 13, 2013 13:40:10 #
Your critter close-ups are great! Love the composition of study in green.
Feb 13, 2013 13:44:08 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Your critter close-ups are great! Love the composition of study in green.
Thanks. Many years ago I lived in Bangor, just a kid, really loved it. Spent many vacations with my wife and sons in the Boothbay Harbor area.
Feb 13, 2013 13:49:31 #
DWHJR wrote:
Thanks. Many years ago I lived in Bangor, just a kid, really loved it. Spent many vacations with my wife and sons in the Boothbay Harbor area.
Linda From Maine wrote:
Your critter close-ups are great! Love the composition of study in green.
Thanks. Many years ago I lived in Bangor, just a kid, really loved it. Spent many vacations with my wife and sons in the Boothbay Harbor area.
It's truly a small world! I move from Bangor to central Washington a little over 10 years ago. A bit gentler climate!
Feb 13, 2013 13:51:08 #
Feb 13, 2013 14:00:04 #
Feb 13, 2013 14:04:01 #
Feb 13, 2013 14:04:50 #
Feb 13, 2013 14:20:06 #
Your butterfly is commonly known as a skipper, and your bee is most likely a variety of carpenter bee. Both images are well-detailed close-up photographs.
Feb 13, 2013 14:23:31 #
Feb 13, 2013 14:29:33 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
Your butterfly is commonly known as a skipper, and your bee is most likely a variety of carpenter bee. Both images are well-detailed close-up photographs.
Thanks for your kind comments. I hope one day soon to be joining you folks on the macro thread. But first I must decide on what lens to go for. I' m torn between macro or a telephoto, good glass is expensive. In your opinion how important is IS in macro work or should flash take care of camera shake. I'm a Canon shooter and am torn between the 100mm 2.8 or the 100mm 2.8 IS. You thoughts please, thanks Doug.
Feb 13, 2013 14:38:58 #
DWHJR wrote:
Without any hesitation, I recommend Image Stabilization (aka Vibration Reduction). 18-months ago, I upgraded from a Nikkor 105D (A-F but no VR) to a Nikkor 105G (A-F + VR). If I had to purchase outright, I would strongly consider the Sigma 105 macro OS (Optical Stabilization). In my opinion, and many others, extremely high quality imaging at an affordable price.I'm a Canon shooter and am torn between the 100mm 2.8 or the 100mm 2.8 IS.
Feb 13, 2013 14:40:46 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
DWHJR wrote:
Without any hesitation, I recommend Image Stabilization (aka Vibration Reduction). 18-months ago, I upgraded from a Nikkor 105D (A-F but no VR) to a Nikkor 105G (A-F + VR). If I had to purchase outright, I would strongly consider the Sigma 105 macro OS (Optical Stabilization). In my opinion, and many others, extremely high quality imaging at an affordable price.I'm a Canon shooter and am torn between the 100mm 2.8 or the 100mm 2.8 IS.
Thanks so much for your speedy reply. Jeez add more confusion to my lens investigation. LOL Thanks again.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.