I have LightRoom 6 and my machine crashed, so I went to reinstall it. No big deal it is a licensed registered version. I downloaded the same version from Adobe's website, I entered the key that was stored on their website and it said it was invalid. After wasting an hour on chat with them as it turns out when you purchase LightRoom, although it does not expire you can't reinstall it after a year. Naturally it is because they want to sell you their Cloud Version. As far as I am concerned this is the lowest of low. If they don't want to support it, it is one thing. But to not let you use it is just plain wrong. I don't know what to go with but it will not be an Adobe product.

Perhaps you should read it again. I use a Canon one which I believe to be the only other dual element close up lens, it is my understanding that Nikon made them and stopped, I would assume you know this as you have it listed under your equipment. My suggestion was to go to flickr and search for examples. What is acceptable quality to one person is not acceptable to another. No lens tests will come back with a Raynox with exceptional quality in the corners. Who cares unless you are photographing something like stamps? I mean you own one so you don’t care about corners.

I have read on numerous websites how all close up filters drastically diminish the quality of an image. I believed that until I saw an image that was taken with a 1.4 tele-converter, a 100mm macro and a Raynox. That is when I stopped believing others as all they have to offer is opinions. Let’s see some proof. Where do you find that, well you can at flickr when you search for equipment? If some equipment is bad all shots should be bad.

As for the link to other hardware, there are more solutions for macro shots than using macro lenses close up filters, etc and that page goes over the basic hardware choices. I thought I was being helpful but I guess not. On that site you will also find a page that explains in detail why people use the macro set-ups that can be found on pages 4, 5, & 6 here: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-32754-4.html Where is it on the UHH site – why, in detail, do people use these macro set-ups? I would bet the person asking the question about Raynox has no idea as to why. For that matter why even bring it up the question was about Raynox, not macro set-ups. Oh were you trying to be helpful? I’ll put it like this, Nikonian72, I tried to be helpful and after your reply which is typical of people on the UHH. I won’t be doing it again.

I have not used a Raynox but I am into macro photography and I have seen exceptional photos taken with one. I was going to purchase one and a Canon one came up cheap on Craig's list. So I got the Canon which is also double element like the Raynox. I find it exceptional. I have read in numerous reviews that all close up lenses are junk. Perhaps they are if you are taking photos of test charts but in the real world they have a purpose and they serve a function and they do it well. If you really want to know how good they are I would suggest that you go to flickr and do a search for Raynox and view photos taken with one. You will find many that are better than those taken with a true macro lens - it is the operator.

At the end of the day it is really just learning how to shoot real macro shots and once you do you can use any kind of hardware. I have used reversed lenses, extension tubes, stacked lenses, macro lenses, bellows, enlarger lenses, virtually everything you have heard of I have tried.

I would get some decent shots and a lot that weren’t, then one day it sort of clicked and all of my shots seemed to get better. I was asked to put on a little macro class so I thought I should go through some of the hardware choices. When writing about the hardware choices it made no sense to not include a photo taken with that setup. So I dug out the old stuff I tried along the way and took some shots. I never spent more than 5 minutes or ten shots to get a sample that was good. I mean real good with some of the options costing cost next to nothing.

My point is, it is not going to be the equipment it is going to be the operator as I mentioned above.

Anyway, the down side of the close up lens is that it has to be removed in order to take a regular shot. Think of it like this, you are all set to take a photo of a bee and he takes off, two feet away there is a Butterfly and you have a choice get within six inches of it (depends on the lens you have on) and fill a frame with half of him or remove the close up filter and get a regular shot not a true macro shot. With a real macro lens you would just focus on him. I am not sure on this one but I think the Raynox clips on and off which would be a big plus. Other ones are like filters that screw on and off and that takes time.

So that is the big negative, you have to remove them to take a regular shot and the image degrades somewhat. Well you will have seen from those flickr photos it may degrade but not much.

On the positive side you have a couple of biggies; you don’t lose any light like most other macro options, and to top it off you still may be able to use autofocus.
The key to deciding on which equipment to get is to first decide on what you want to shoot.

For instance if you want to take photos of stamps you may not want to use a close up filter as the corners will not be as sharp as those with a macro lens. In that case since stamps don't move, for about the same amount of money as the Raynox you could get a cheap set of tubes, a reversing adapter and an enlarger lens. This quality of this option is exceptional, but very difficult to use for live bugs or when first starting out.

You can learn more about macro hardware here
http://www.macroshooting.com/Hardware.htm

I didn't get it either but if it's more complex than this I don't get it


An 85-year-old man was requested by his Doctor for a sperm count as part of his physical exam. The doctor gave the man a jar and said, 'Take This jar home and bring back a semen sample tomorrow.'

The next day the 85-year-old man reappeared At the doctor's office and gave him the jar, which was as clean and empty as on the previous day.

The doctor asked what happened and the man explained, 'Well, doc, it's like this -- first I tried with my right hand, but nothing. Then I tried With my left hand, but still nothing. 'Then I asked my wife for help. She tried with her right hand, then with her left, still nothing. She tried with her mouth, first with the teeth in, then with her teeth out, still nothing.

'We even called up Arleen, the lady next door and she tried too, first with both hands, then an armpit, and she even tried squeezin' it between her knees, but still nothing..' The doctor was shocked!
*'You asked your neighbor?' * The old man replied 'Yep, none of us could get the jar open.'

Rosco actually has a couple of them. I got mine from http://www.stagespot.com/catalog/product/view/id/2064/ it was $25 and change delivered for 5 books. I was only after the ND filters and they ended up being about $1 each which beats the $13 I was paying for one Kodak ones.

If you don’t know what gels are I won’t bore you with details, if you are a newbie all you need to know is that for the most part it is just colored plastic that you can shoot light through. So if you use two flashes you can focus one flash on the subject and then one with a gel on the background - with a white wall you can have virtually any color you want. Keep in mind I am making this simple. Some of these are optically better than glass and are used on a lens for color correction.

Mostly they are used by the movie industry and they usually purchase large ones and they have hundreds available to choose from. With so many available manufacturers such as Lee, Rosco, GamColor etc. put out swatch books for free. These swatches are for the most part to small for anything in the movie industry, however they are large enough to cover a flash head. Well over time people figured this out so for the most part they are not free anymore but real close. They are around $5 each delivered (some will say free and charge you $5 for shipping) and most contains 100 of samples. The swatch sizes are not the same but all of them that I have gotten will cover the head of your flash.

These sets also contain ND filters so if you have a holder in the back of your lens you can cut them to fit. The swatches are big enough so that you can get two ND filters out of each swatch. The sample books usually have a 0.3, .09 and a 1.2 so, 1 stop, 3 stops and 4 stop filters for $5.

Thank you - for now what I am going to attempt is to use the dryer sheet and then a micro fibre cloth to clean off the residue. I can get it real good and from what I have read (not tested) if a filter is not perfect do not worry about it espceially if it is in the back. I don't photograph test charts so I might as well give it a go.

Thanks, I guess I will have to hope that works. I just put one of the filters in an aluminum foil envelope, went out side and placed it on what I would assume is a good ground. The SS rail for from my pool. I rubbed it back and forth carefully as I know how soft the fiter is. I bring it back in the house and the same thing.

So then I take another filter (I have the 5 sample packs so hundreds of them that I will never use) rub it with one of those cling free dryer sheets and it works. However now it is cloudy with all the chemicals on it.

So, I put the cling free sheet under a micro fibre cloth and rub another micro fibre cloth on top. A little cloudy so I clean it off and it still has static. Perhaps it is not static, it is like a magnet. What I do to test is hold up a lens cleaning tissue and then the filter if the tissue moves I move the filter to the other side and check again.

I disagree; ebay is a starting point as well. Here goes the story. I bid on a macro flash bracket (an old one) I lose the auction and it sells for $65 with freight. Another one comes up with an opening bid of $20 so I bid on it and the same day one appears on Craig’s list for $45. I figure what a deal and I buy the one on Craig’s list for almost a third less. I was quite proud of myself for getting such a great deal until the auction ended on ebay and I ended up with that one for $20. So this all happened within three days how was ebay the price setter? Why do people pay more on ebay for some items than they can get elsewhere? It is all what are you willing to pay. BTW, if you want a nice Stroboframe macro bracket for $45 let me know.

[quote=RWR][quote=kpassaur]I need to remove static electricity on gelatin filters.

I have tried the brush on a lens cleaning pen. I have read that years ago they made some for film that worked but they were taken off the market as some spy used the chemicals in one to kill someone. Don’t know if that is a true story, but it made for an interesting read.

I would assume (naturally incorrectly) that all lens and negative brushes would have some ability to reduce static it just to keep the dust off.

Yes, but keep in mind when you research for a solution you get all kinds. The dryer sheet is mentioned frequently so I would assume it works for some fabrics. My thought is it does work most likely work but it is putting a coating of chemicals on the fabric. I don't want anything on my filters. I'm very new to gelatin filters. I used them once a couple of years ago. However, I want to try some long exposure daytime shots and from what I have read you frequently need 15-16 stops. (the articles have been saying the lee big stopper is not enough, you need a big and little stopper) Anyway two of my lenses have slots for filters and with the 15mm fisheye you couldn't put anything on the front even if you wanted to.

The Kodak NDs are not expensive at all. I know they are somewhat disposable and a pain to use but this is to give it a go and see how I like it. The most I paid was $37 for an ND 4.0 and I can cut it into four pieces. This beats the $150 for a big stopper. Plus you can get samples from lee and Rosco and use them as well. A sample book costs around $5 delivered and some have up to 8 filters in them once cut plus you have the others to put on your flash.
The key now is the storage and static electricity issue.
.

I need to remove static electricity on gelatin filters. What is happening is that they are sticking to everything which makes it extremely difficult to get them in the slot in the back of the lens. Plus if you stack them they now have to be separated somehow. I have looked online but have not really come up with anything that I could use. Most solutions are, increase humidity, (I live in Florida) use a dryer sheet in when drying clothes.

Currently I have the filters cut to size and I have wrapped them in the old fashion lens cleaning paper so that they won’t get scratched. (looks like dryer sheets but with no chemicals that I know of) I then put them in a little baggie and then the baggie goes in a wallet. (One of those metal credit card ones)

The filters themselves were either samples from Lee or Rosco or regular ones from Kodak. All of them are ND filters but the ND is not the issue as it does it with the other sample ones.

I was thinking gelatin filters have been around a long time so I’m sure this must have been an issue at some point.

Well it is all about value - how much do you have to have it. For me now, I have all ranges covered from 15 to 500mm. Do I have all of the fastest lenses, no, they would be nice, but only if I can find a deal. My attitude is really, if I buy it, can I play with it for a while and sell it for what I paid or a little more. You know have a free hobby.

However, there are those out there that lowball everyone etc. I am just not one of them. The only time I ever tried to get a better price off of someone is when they wanted to much to begin with. There were two people at the same time that were selling an MPE-65 and this was something I really wanted. One guy wanted $900 and the other guy wanted $850. I explained that Canon sells they refurbished with a warranty for $850 and sent them a link to show them I wasn’t making this up. The guy that wanted $850 said, so they are out of stock and I can get $850 on ebay. Well if he sold it for $850 he would end up netting about $770. The other man responded, I certainly would not pay more for one with no warranty; would you give me $650 for it? Well that was about 6 months ago and the one for $850 was on Craig’s last time I looked.

The classic I love is when someone says I am a professional and I know what it is worth so don’t lowball me - and they have it priced 5% below new. This is not uncommon either.

There is no way to tell exactly - it is what it will bring at the moment. I have a pile of camera equipment and it all came from the profits of buying and selling camera equipment. I look on Craig’s list and see people that want more than what something currently sells for new. And then there are those that say it goes for “x” on Amazon. It doesn’t sell for that it is just someone who wants that much for it.

I only deal with Canon equipment or studio lights. With Canon equipment this is how I look at it and how I determine what I will pay. Canon sells refurbished at a discount and it has their warranty. So, used in mint condition backed by the manufacturer it is worth “x” dollars. Someone on ebay can perhaps get more depending upon the day and how clueless the buyer is. So you look at refurbished and let’s say they want $1000, what is that warranty worth? How much do I want to risk by purchasing on ebay? If you say gee, I would skip the warranty and take a chance if I could get it for $900. Well that’s what it is worth to you. I wouldn’t do it to save $100. I’d want 2-3 hundred less because of the risk.

You mentioned KEH camera, I have purchased things from them for 20 – 30 percent less than what they were selling for on ebay. Other things they want more for. It is really because of them that I got into buying and selling camera equipment. A friend of mine was looking for a camera and I found one on Craig’s list that was a real deal. What the man did was get a price from KEH and then he said I’ll put it on Craig’s list for a couple of days and see if it moves, I wouldn’t mine someone local getting a deal.

Well the camera came with three lenses, my friend put one on ebay with a buy it now of 15% more than he paid for everything. It was sold within an hour. His 15% covered ebay and PayPal fees. He got the camera and two lenses for free. He gave me one lens for finding him the deal. It was at that point I realized how I could get the equipment I wanted.

Now here is one for you – what is it worth? Last year on ebay a Sigma 150-500 was selling for close to $800 used (average selling price, ebay used to publish them I don’t know if they still do) and new I think they were around $1000 or $1100 I am not sure. I had one in excellent condition that I bought for $600 on Craig’s list. However it was the older model where if you tried you could peel off the finish with your fingernail (fine Sigma quality). There were two spots about 1/8 inch each, you really had to look for them but they were there so to me it was not mint.

Anyway, I put it on Craig’s list for $725, I figured I could get $800 on ebay and then after their fees and PayPal $725 is about what I would net. About 6 months went by and then someone purchased it. Everyone won, they got to inspect it, pay less than on ebay and I made $125 off of it and I used it for a year. Well a couple of months later Sigma put them on sale I think for 8-9 hundred anyway the price dropped. So I picked up a later version with the good finish for $550. Now tell me what is it worth?

The answer is easy, to me it is worth $550 I am sure it is worth 7-8 hundred to some people. Why is it worth $550, I have the Canon 100-400 so I am getting a little more reach (it certainly is not a must have lens - none of them are now) , and I can sell it for more than I paid for it.

Has anyone ever used a wooden tripod? They are supposed to be the best for reducing vibration. From what I have read ideally you want one made out of New England Rock Maple or Ash.