Nikon D750 & D780

I feel safer with the 85, knowing that I have 1.4 to play with. I never get that wide, f2 is normally a sweet spot for me but it's nice to have just in case. I know 70-200 may have VR but that's not really any help when it comes to moving subjects.

70-200 is ace for the couple portraits though, and I like to use something tele for group shots if the space allows but again the 85 is nice for that so not worth swapping over lenses for.
 
andy1868 said:
I feel safer with the 85, knowing that I have 1.4 to play with. I never get that wide, f2 is normally a sweet spot for me but it's nice to have just in case. I know 70-200 may have VR but that's not really any help when it comes to moving subjects.

70-200 is ace for the couple portraits though, and I like to use something tele for group shots if the space allows but again the 85 is nice for that so not worth swapping over lenses for.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. I always shoot my 1.4s around 1.8-2.2 unless I really need wide open.
 
kingo15 said:
I can't use a ds4 for games like that. I only play driving games really. Got hooked and brought a decent driving sim set up oppps
Click to expand...
I have GT Sport, Project Cars 2 and F1 2017 (y)
 
I never thought I would like the 70-200 2.8 but it's now by far my most used lens!

But I don't do weddings and its mostly for equestrian, and you need to shoot horses above a certain focal length if you want to get the proportions correct!
 
JJ! said:
I never thought I would like the 70-200 2.8 but it's now by far my most used lens!

But I don't do weddings and its mostly for equestrian, and you need to shoot horses above a certain focal length if you want to get the proportions correct!
Click to expand...
How can anyone not love a good 70-200mm f2.8 :love:
 
Had a weird one earlier whilst out searching for kingfishers.

On dx mode the focus was bang on everytime.

on fx mode it was back focusing i have checked it on the laptop since ive got back and it was definitely missing the log i was focusing on.

Kept swapping back and forth and everytime in dx mode it focussed on the log first time everytime
 
Livin The Dream said:
Was just about to say the same thing. How have you guys got so much time on your hands, do you suffer sleep deprivation?
Click to expand...

I sneak off from 10 -12 and then come back and feed eva then she will sleep through the night with the help of a good old swaddle
 
kingo15 said:
best ones about at the min.

i went out got a fanatec wheel and pedals ooops
Click to expand...
You got that for when the baby gets older didnt you...:D
 
Bright sunshine and 23 degs and for me that means insect weather :) Here is one from today`s sortie.
Small Copper.
Small Copper by Graham, on Flickr
 
Livin The Dream said:
Was just about to say the same thing. How have you guys got so much time on your hands, do you suffer sleep deprivation?
Click to expand...
Yes :sleep:

kingo15 said:
Had a weird one earlier whilst out searching for kingfishers.

On dx mode the focus was bang on everytime.

on fx mode it was back focusing i have checked it on the laptop since ive got back and it was definitely missing the log i was focusing on.

Kept swapping back and forth and everytime in dx mode it focussed on the log first time everytime
Click to expand...
Weird :confused:
 
Lemaildetom said:
LoL!!!

Just tested mine ping=50ms download=13.45mbps upload=0.77mbps
Welcome to the north of scotland!
Click to expand...
You don’t have to be in the north of Scotland to have poor internet speed. I’m 50 miles from London, mine is download 2.86 Mbps upload 0.85 Mbps. The local exchange is just poor, it was supposed to be upgraded but they keep on saying it will but it never seems to happen.
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
@Tomgreen
sent you a pm
Click to expand...

Thanks, will have a look.

T_J_G said:
85mm.

:D
Click to expand...


I have been thinking of it. My main thinking though is initially to go for the safe bet of 24-70 2.8 + 70-200 2.8 until I find my focal lengths. Once I have found out where most of my shots are at weddings, I may choose to go prime.


Livin The Dream said:
I think 70-200 initially is the 'safe' option for weddings, all depends how you shoot. You can normally get close enough with 85 for sure. But they are heavy beasts to lug around.
Click to expand...

True, but with the size of me I would hope a 1.5 kg lens won’t be an issue :LOL:

andy1868 said:
That may have been said in jest, maybe not but I agree! 85mm doesn't leave my camera at weddings. The other body tends to have 35 or maybe 24/70 depending on location :) My 70-200 barely gets used, in fact I the last wedding I used it at was May 2016 :eek:
Click to expand...

That’s interesting, I guess it takes time to find out your personal preferences though. I think to begin with, im better getting as much coverage as I can and then specify more later on. Also want the 70-200 for landscapes as well :)
 
Tom Green said:
Thanks, will have a look.




I have been thinking of it. My main thinking though is initially to go for the safe bet of 24-70 2.8 + 70-200 2.8 until I find my focal lengths. Once I have found out where most of my shots are at weddings, I may choose to go prime.




True, but with the size of me I would hope a 1.5 kg lens won’t be an issue :LOL:



That’s interesting, I guess it takes time to find out your personal preferences though. I think to begin with, im better getting as much coverage as I can and then specify more later on. Also want the 70-200 for landscapes as well :)
Click to expand...

I've never used a 24-70 or 70-200 at a wedding, it doesn't suit how I shoot at all. But I knew this before I went into weddings.
 
andy1868 said:
I wish I had time for gaming these days :| Saying that, even when I did I would just play whichever Battlefield was the most recent at that point :LOL: BF4 was the pinnacle though, superb game!
Click to expand...
Agreed on both points time and BF4 excellent.
I really love ww2 combat flight sims multiplayer also.
 
Does anyone use a macro filter rather than a macro lens? Thoughts?
 
KitsuneAndy said:
Does anyone use a macro filter rather than a macro lens? Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Have used some I got off Amazon wasn't over impressed with them.
After I sent them back did some reading up and yeah they were working correctly it wasn't just what I was expecting after the read up o the advert.
All depends how close and how much detail you were after.
How much of a pixel peeper are you haha
 
KitsuneAndy said:
Does anyone use a macro filter rather than a macro lens? Thoughts?
Click to expand...
The ones I've used have never been that great, unless you are after a soft focus effect round the edges! But they've not always been the best of filters. The lower their magnification the better they've been. Two element ones like Raynox are pretty good. Extension tubes have worked better for me.

What sort of subjects do you have in mind?
 
KitsuneAndy said:
Does anyone use a macro filter rather than a macro lens? Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Yup. I have a set of Kood screw on ones. They were very cheap and I've had them for years now although I haven't used them for some time now. They often come in sets of three and can be used individually or stacked.

These things will not give you the quality you'll get from a macro lens but IMO they're useful to have in the bag for the odd flower shot etc. I found mine to be very acceptable in the centre area but things will get softer towards the edges and obviously you won't be able to retain infinity focus. I suppose it all depends on how much quality you're willing to trade off for the convenience of being able to fit one to your lens and focus closely.

This is the sort of thing I used to use mine for.

1-IMG_6132-R.jpg

I1-MG_6133-R.jpg
 
Last edited:
kingo15 said:
Have used some I got off Amazon wasn't over impressed with them.
After I sent them back did some reading up and yeah they were working correctly it wasn't just what I was expecting after the read up o the advert.
All depends how close and how much detail you were after.
How much of a pixel peeper are you haha
Click to expand...

Ed Sutton said:
The ones I've used have never been that great, unless you are after a soft focus effect round the edges! But they've not always been the best of filters. The lower their magnification the better they've been. Two element ones like Raynox are pretty good. Extension tubes have worked better for me.

What sort of subjects do you have in mind?
Click to expand...

woof woof said:
Yup. I have a set of Kood screw on ones. They were very cheap and I've had them for years now although I haven't used them for some time now. They often come in sets of three and can be used individually or stacked.

These things will not give you the quality you'll get from a macro lens but IMO useful to have in the bag for the odd flower shot etc. I fond mine to be very acceptable in the centre area but things will get softer towards the edges and obviously you won't be able to retain infinity focus. I suppose it all depends on how much quality you're willing to trade off for the convenience of being able to fit one to your lens and focus closely.

This is the sort of thing I used to use mine for.

View attachment 124609

View attachment 124611
Click to expand...

It's just for one or two detail shots at weddings, so no pixel peeping required :) If there was a macro that was in the middle of some focal lengths I already have, then I'd get one. But they clash with something.

At the minute I generally just use my 35mm and crop in a bit.
 
The Raynox ones cost a lot more than the basic one lens element sets like the set I have. I think mine cost £14 years ago.. I've just had a quick look on Amazon and these basic ones start at under £10 for a set, at that price they're at least worth a look.

You'd have to compare the quality you'd get from these against the quality of a cropped picture. For a mostly subject central shot such as a ring shot I'd imagine they'd be ok and any fall off towards the edges may actually help the shot :D
 
Last edited:
KitsuneAndy said:
If there was a macro that was in the middle of some focal lengths I already have, then I'd get one. But they clash with something.

At the minute I generally just use my 35mm and crop in a bit.
Click to expand...

If 85mm lenses focused closer than 100yds I'd use one instead of a macro lens.:D

I've just had a mess around with a couple of close up filters and the x2 was much better than the x4, and better than I'd remembered. Might be worth a punt, but if cropping does the trick it might be better to stick with that.
 
KitsuneAndy said:
It's just for one or two detail shots at weddings, so no pixel peeping required :) If there was a macro that was in the middle of some focal lengths I already have, then I'd get one. But they clash with something.

At the minute I generally just use my 35mm and crop in a bit.
Click to expand...

I’ve got a set of close up filters but struggled to get along with them. I should play with them more before the season starts.
 
As I am the one here that prefers Macro/close-up photography, I would recommend a Raynox 150 or 250, The 150 being the weaker one and maybe easier to work with.
I know that they cost that fair bit extra but I think they are worth it.
 
KitsuneAndy said:
It's just for one or two detail shots at weddings, so no pixel peeping required :) If there was a macro that was in the middle of some focal lengths I already have, then I'd get one. But they clash with something.

At the minute I generally just use my 35mm and crop in a bit.
Click to expand...

I have occasionally used a Hoya diopter on my 85 which gets close enough and quality is ok. The 85 hasn’t got a very good close up focus distance though. Its fine for my occasional use. Shot this with it, but probably last time I used it:

27908056513_142f5d9c57_b.jpg
 
Livin The Dream said:
I have occasionally used a Hoya diopter on my 85 which gets close enough and quality is ok. The 85 hasn’t got a very good close up focus distance though. Its fine for my occasional use. Shot this with it, but probably last time I used it:

27908056513_142f5d9c57_b.jpg
Click to expand...

I have contemplated picking up a siggy 105 as they normally go for £250 or a bit less secondhand. But realistically, macro doesn’t interest me much at all.

If you can wait till June, you’re more than welcome to give the filter a try.
 
Last edited:
I've had a Parblo a160 10 x 6 graphics tablet for a couple of weeks.

Very impressed so far easy to use and very accurate. And at a price tag of around 40 quid after discount offers. Very happy
 
Livin The Dream said:
I have contemplated picking up a siggy 105 as they normally go for £250 or a bit less secondhand. But realistically, macro doesn’t interest me much at all.

If you can wait till June, you’re more than welcome to give the filter a try.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm the same, no real interest in Macro, but would come in handy a couple of times at a wedding. Might do that :) I'm in no rush.

Seeing that couple this Sunday for pre-wedding shoot with their little'n, so will be able to give you more details soon!
 
At last rain:



Has been replaced by sunshine:





And I've put my 28-300 out of reach!
 
Anyone else finding lightroom glitchy after the latest update? Things like the crop tool and brush tool have a bit of a lag, as does the colour saturation/hue/luminance tool when you use it to click on the image on the colour you want to adjust and then drag up and down to adjust it.
 
Yes I was noticing that last night, I ended up unplugging the external drive so it could work off the previews. Much faster but not great for checking critical focus :thinking:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top